The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 7.5 Sustainable Comm Land Use Off' nU~~~ STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK ~ CITY COUNCIL File #430-50 DATE: April 17, 2012 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJECT: Sustainable Communities Strategy Preferred Land Use Scenario Prepared by Marnie R. Delgado, Senior Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) are preparing a Sustainable Communities Strategy for the nine-county Bay Area region in accordance with Senate Bill 375. The Sustainable Community Strategy is a 25 year land use strategy for the Bay Area that identifies areas to accommodate all of the region's population, including all income groups, and forecasts a land use pattern that when integrated with the transportation system reduces greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. The availability of future grant funding opportunities at the local jurisdiction level will be tied to implementation of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. To date, a total of five land use scenarios have been developed by ABAG and MTC. On March 9, 2012, the final land use scenario, the Preferred Scenario, was released and ABAG and MTC are currently soliciting comments from local jurisdictions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact at this time. Future implementation of the Sustainable Communities Strategy could have financial impacts which are not known at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the report and direct Staff to provide comments to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). ..~mM..~a,~... ~ _ Submitted By Reviewed By Director of Community Development Assistant City Manager Page 1 of 4 ITEM NO. 7.5 DESCRIPTION: Background Senate Bill 375 became law in 2008 and calls for the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for all metropolitan regions of California. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have been charged with preparing the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the nine-county Bay Area region. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a land use strategy that will attempt to coordinate land use with the transportation network in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. To that end, housing and jobs will be concentrated in areas with easy access to transit. The SCS land use strategy will also influence the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) which is a key component of the General Plan Housing Element. The Sustainable Communities Strategy will be adopted in 2013 as part of the Regional Transportation Plan. On May 17, 2011, Staff presented a report to the City Council on the Initial Vision Scenario (Attachment 1). The Initial Vision Scenario was the first attempt to create a regional land use plan. Staff solicited feedback from the City Council and provided comments to ABAG and MTC (Attachment 2). At the February 8, 2012 City Council meeting, Staff presented the Alternative Scenarios and solicited feedback from the City Council (Attachment 3). Subsequently, Staff sent a letter to ABAG and MTC expressing concerns over the housing and jobs allocations (Attachment 4). The information gleaned from the Initial Vision Scenario and Alternative Scenarios were to be used by ABAG and MTC to inform the Preferred Scenario. On March 9, 2012, ABAG and MTC released the Preferred Scenario and are once again soliciting feedback from local jurisdictions. Staff has reviewed the household and job growth projections for the Preferred Scenario and prepared a response letter to ABAG and MTC (Attachment 5). ANALYSIS: Preferred Scenario Household Growth Projections The Preferred Scenario includes projected household growth Citywide. Unlike previous land use scenarios, the Preferred Scenario does not currently include a breakdown by Priority Development Area. In the Preferred Scenario, Dublin is projected to accommodate a total of 36,560 housing units by 2040; Staff estimates a total of 28,701 housing units at ultimate build- out which is 7,859 fewer housing units. Because the draft Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario released on March 9, 2012 does not provide a breakdown of housing units by Priority Development Area, it is unknown where these additional 7,859 housing units are proposed to be located. Table 1 below provides Dublin's estimates of housing growth both Citywide and by PDA. Page 2 of 4 Table 1: Projected Housing Units (2040) Preferred City Scenario Estimates Downtown Dublin PDA N/A 1,634' Town Center PDA N/A 5,9492,s Transit Center PDA N/A 3,4004 Total In PDAs N/A 10,983 Total Outside PDAs N/A 17,7185 Citywide Total 36,560 28,701 X334 existing units as of 2011; 1,300 new units per the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan ZBased on approved entitlements and units remaining per the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan 385 units could be added if the Area GPublic/Semi-Public site is converted to residential 41,800 units at the Dublin Transit Center and 1,600 units at Camp Parks/SunCal 52,021 units may be added if the following are entitled: Doolan Canyon (1,990), Positano P/SP(12) and Area F P/SP (19) The City's estimates are based on current Planning documents including the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. Any additional housing units, above and beyond what is currently planned for in these documents, would require amendments to the General Plan and/or applicable Specific Plan, environmental review and an evaluation of infrastructure needs. In some cases the amount of land available for development may not be able to accommodate the number of units allocated in certain areas of the City. In addition, ABAG and MTC have not identified funding sources to pay for these planning documents. In addition, there is a correlation between the Sustainable Communities Strategy and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA feeds into the General Plan Housing Element which is required to be updated periodically and certified by the State. The overestimation of housing growth in the Preferred Scenario has the potential to result in an inflated housing unit allocation as part of RHNA for the 2014-2022 planning period. Thus, the inflated housing unit allocation could jeopardize the City's ability to achieve a certified Housing Element. Employment Growth Projections The Preferred Scenario includes projected job growth Citywide. Unlike previous land use scenarios, the Preferred Scenario does not currently include a breakdown by Priority Development Area. In the Preferred Scenario, Dublin is projected to accommodate a total of 28,060 jobs by 2040; Staff estimates a total of 44,901 jobs at ultimate build-out which is 16,841 more jobs. Because the draft Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario released on March 9, 2012 does not provide a breakdown of jobs by Priority Development Area it is unknown where jobs are being allocated and whether the Preferred Scenario is capitalizing on the City's two Bay Area Rapid Transit Stations for future job growth. Table 2 below provides Dublin's estimates of job growth both Citywide and by PDA. Page 3 of 4 Table 2: Projected Jobs (2040) Preferred City Scenario Estimates Downtown Dublin PDA N/A 5,952 Town Center PDA N/A 3,014 Transit Center PDA N/A 9,028 Total In PDAs N/A 17,994 Total Outside PDAs N/A 26,907 Citywide Total 28,060 44,901 The underestimation of employment growth appears to assert that jobs would be directed to the urban core leaving commercial property in Dublin vacant or assumed to be converted to residential use. Failure to recognize the job growth potential within Dublin, and especially within the Transit Center Priority Development Area (PDA), undermines the value of this PDA and its ability to capitalize on the financial investments made by the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART). Next Steps ABAG and MTC have requested comments on the Preferred Scenario from local jurisdictions by April 20, 2012. Staff has prepared a draft letter to ABAG and MTC with comments on the Preferred Scenario's housing and employment growth projections (see Attachment 5). The Preferred Scenario is scheduled to be approved by ABAG and MTC in May 2012 along with the draft Regional Housing Needs Methodology. ABAG and MTC will then evaluate the Preferred Scenario against predetermined performance targets and also begin preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Local feedback is being solicited through September 2012 and the Draft Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and EIR are expected to be released in November 2012. ABAG and MTC anticipate adopting the Sustainable Communities Strategy and Regional Transportation Plan and adopting the Environmental Impact Report in April 2013. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: This is an informational report to the City Council at the request of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to receive input from elected officials on the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy. An informational report is not subject to a public hearing and therefore a public notice is not required. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Staff Report dated May 17, 2011, without attachments 2. Initial Vision Scenario Comment letter dated May 20, 2011 3. City Council Staff Report dated February 7, 2012, without attachments 4. Alternative Scenarios Comment letter dated February 8, 2012 5. Draft Preferred Scenario Comment letter dated April 18, 2012 Page 4 of 4 G~~~ OF DU~~~ 19~~~~`~ STAFF REPORT CITY C L E R K ~ l// DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL File # ?®03 04LIFOR~S . DATE: May 17, 2011 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJECT: Sustainable Communities Strategy Initial Vision Scenario Report prepared by Marnie R. Waffle, Senior Planner Ma' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) are preparing a Sustainable Communities Strategy for the nine-county Bay Area region in accordance with Senate Bill 375 and are soliciting comments from local jurisdictions on the distribution of housing units to accommodate the region's population growth over the next 25 years as well as projected job growth. The proposed allocation of housing • units and job growth to the City of Dublin is not consistent with current Planning policies. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time. Future implementation of the Sustainable Communities Strategy could have financial impacts which are not known at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the report and direct Staff to provide comments to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) on the Initial Vision Scenario. . bmi ed B Review y Community Development Director Assistant City Manager Page 7 of 7 ITEII~ N®. ~ . ~ , DESCRIPTION: Background Senate Bill 375 became law in 2008 and calls for the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy for all metropolitan regions of California. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG} and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have been charged with preparing the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the. nine-county Bay Area region. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a land use strategy that will attempt to coordinate land use with the transportation network in order to reduce green house gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. To that end, housing and jobs will be concentrated in areas with easy access to transit. The SCS land use strategy will also influence the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The State of California estimates that the ,Bay Area will grow by over 2 million people by the year 2035 resulting in a need for over 900,000 new housing units. The SCS will identify areas within the Bay Area where the region's population can be accommodated over the next 25 years including housing for all income levels. The Sustainable Communities Strategy will be adopted as part of the Regional Transportation Plan and funding for local projects will be tied to conformance with the Sustainable Communities Strategy. The Initial Vision Scenario is the first attempt to create a regional land use plan for the Sustainable Communities Strategy .and to accommodate the projected 900,000. new housing units throughout the nine-county Bay Area region. -On March 11, 2010 the Initial Vision Scenario (Attachment 1) was released at a joint meeting of the MTC Planning Committee and the ABAG Administrative Committee. The Initial Vision Scenario focuses on concentrating the projected 900,000 housing units within designated Priority Development Areas (PDAs). The City of Dublin has three PDAs: 1) Dublin Town Center; 2) Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings; and, 3) Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area (Attachments 2-4). The Initial Vision Scenario also includes job growth projections. According to ABAG, Dublin is one of the major East Bay job centers in the Tri-Valley along with Pleasanton, Livermore and San Ramon and continues to attract a range of businesses. According to the Initial Vision Scenario, job growth in. Dublin is projected to increase 85% by 2035. The distribution of jobs wilt be further analyzed by ABAG and MTC in the Detailed Scenario which. is the next phase in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy. ABAG and MTC have been soliciting input from loco! jurisdictions through a variety of forums since the release of the Initial Vision Scenario. An East County Elected Officials meeting was held on March 24, 2011 at the Dublin Library and presentations have been made to the Alameda County Planning Directors and the Alameda County Technical Advisory .Working Group which was formed to provide input on the Countywide Transportation Plan and Transportation Expenditure Plan. ABAG and MTC are also requesting that input be obtained from local elected officials through a presentation to the City Council. J Page 2 of 7 n The analysis below describes the proposed allocation. of housing units to Dublin's three PDAs and the 2035 job growth projections; draft responses to questions being asked by ABAG and MTC are also provided below. Staff has some concerns with the allocation of housing .units to Dublin's three PDAs. As described in further detail below, the allocation of housing units to the Dublin Town Center and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan PDAs exceed what is planned for in these areas and the allocation of housing units to the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings PDA is lower than what is currently planned or anticipated. Staff has also reviewed the Initial Vision Scenario job growth projections and, assuming. ultimate build. out in 2035, estimates more total jobs than the Initial Vision Scenario. ANALYSIS: Initial Vision Scenario The State of California anticipates an additional 900,000 housing units throughout the nine- county Bay Area Region over the next 25 years. The Initial Vision Scenario attempts to concentrate that growth within Priority Development .Areas (PDAs) (Attachment 5'). Housing units have been allocated to PDAs based on the characteristics of the PDA and to take advantage of significant existing and planned transit investments. Place Type Designation ABAG and MTC have created Place Types which define each .PDA based on the specific characteristics of the PDA. All of Dublin's PDAs are designated Suburban Centers. A Suburban Center is defined as follows: Suburban Centers contain a mix of residential, employment, retail, and entertainment uses, usually of slightly lower intensifies than Regional Centers, but similar to City Centers. Suburban Centers can act as .both origin and destination settings for commuters; with a mix of transit service connected to the regional network.. Development in Suburban Centers is often more recent than City Centers, and there are more single-use areas in Suburban Centers. Suburban Centers are served by multiple transit options, often including BART, LRT, or some other fixed-rail transit, but potentially including high volume bus or Bus Rapid Transit, as well as local .bus routes.. Intensities in Suburban Centers are usually noticeably greater within a % mile radius of the transit station than within .the 7/2 -mile radius. Examples of Suburban Centers include Pleasant Hill and Dublin/Pleasanton. Housing Unit Allocation Table 1 below compares the allocation of housing units in the Initial Vision Scenario to the development potential anticipated by the City of Dublin. The "PDA Housing Unit .Number" includes the number of units originally anticipated by the City at the time of .designating each . PDA and was derived from existing Planning documents such as the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and .Downtown Dublin Specific Plan: The '`Revised PDA Housing Unit Number" represents the development potential currently anticipated by the City for each PDA based on actual development projects and current land use regulations as further discussed below. The "IVS Housing Unit Number" was derived by Page 3 of 7 ABAG as part of the Initial Vision Scenario and represents the proposed allocation of housing units to Dublin's PDAs to meet the region's 2035 housing needs. Table 1. Housin Unit Allocation b Priori Develo ment Area Priority Development PDA Revised PDA IVS Area (PDA) Housing Unit Housing Unit Housing Unit Difference. Number Ci` Num'ber Ci Number ABAG Dublin Town Center 4,108 6,072 6,672 +600 Dublin Transit Center/ 3,796 3,300 2,541 -759 Dublin Crossin s Downtown Dublin 541 1,300 2,156 +856 S ecific Plan Totals 8,445 10,672 11,369 +697 The following is a discussion of the housing unit allocation for each of Dublin's 3 PDAs. Dublin Town Center Dublin Town Center is a Planning Subarea within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. This area is largely built out with a variety of newly constructed units including single family and multi-family dweilings and at ultimate build out wilE have approximately 6,072 units. Existing vacant housing sites include Medium/High and High Density residential on Dublin Land Company's property and Medium and Medium/High Density residential on the Lin's property in Area B (Attachment 6). These vacant. sites are included in the 6,072 units anticipated at ultimate build out. In order to accommodate the additional 600 units. the Initial Vision Scenario allocates to this 'PDA, the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific: Plan would need to be amended and additional environmental review completed and infrastructure needs evaluated included water, sewer and roadway capacity. Assuming an additional 600 housing units by 2035 within this PDA is not realistic as the age of the housing stock will still be relatively young and the amount of vacant residential land available cannot reasonably accommodate this many units. Dublin Transi# Center/Dublin Crossings Dublin Transit Center has been approved for up to 1,800 housing units and in 2004, Dublin Crossings (i.e. Camp Parks) was proposed to have up to 1,.996 housing units based on the Alternative 5 Land Use Plan. Based on recent discussions with the developer of the Dublin Crossings project (SunCa!) it is anticipated that this number may be closer to 1,500 units due to current market demand. Therefore, the maximum development potential within the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings PDA is currently estimated to be 3,300 units. The Initial Vision Scenario underestimates the development potential within this PDA by 759 housing units: Downtown Dublin Specific Plan The Downtown Dublin Specific Plan was in the process of being developed when it was approved as a-Priority Development Area and therefore the PDA only reflected the number of housing units planned for in the former West Dublin BART Specific Plan area (541 units). Since adoption of the Downtown Dublin. Specific. Plan, this PDA has been approved for up to 1,300 housing units. The Initial Vision Scenario estimates 856 more housing units within this PDA then what is currently approved in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. Additional development Page 4 of 7 potential within this PDA would :require that the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan be amended and an environmental document prepared. Job Growth In addition to housing unit allocations, the Initial Vision Scenario includes projected job growth throughout the region. The Initial Vision Scenario` projects City-wide job growth in Dublin to increase by 85°lo between 2010 and 2035 from 18,058 jobs to 33,400 jobs. Staff estimates 44,901 jobs at ultimate build out with approximately 17,994 of those jobs being, within PDAs. The location of employment centers and its' relationship to housing and transit will be further analyzed by ABAG and MTC in the next phase of the Sustainable Communities Strategy process, the Detailed Scenario. Response to ABAG ABAG and MTC are currently soliciting comments from local elected officials on the Initial Vision Scenario. The following is a list of questions posed by` ABAG and MTC along with the City's proposed. responses (in italics) which will be provided in the form of a letter (Attachment 7). 1) Is the proposed place type appropriate for your Priority Development Area(s)? Given the availability of resources, is the proposed urban scale, mix of uses, and expected household growth appropriate? All of the City of Dublin's PDAs have a Place Type designation of "Suburban Center". The City feels that this is the most appropriate Place Type designation based on the characteristics of Dublin's 3 PDAs (Dublin Town Center, Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings and Downtown .Dublin ;Specific Plan Area). The City does not .believe that the Initial Vision Scenario's expected household growth rate is appropriate and recommends that the allocation of housing units be .adjusted to align with the City's current Planning documents far each PDA. This would include 6, 072 housing units in the Dublin Town Center PDA; '3, 300 housing units in the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossing PDA; and 9,300 housing units in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan PDA. 2) What transportation improvements would help to support those Priority Development Area(s) in your jurisdiction? Transportation and infrastructure has ..been sized to accommodate the development potential anticipated by the City of Dublin. The allocation of housing units within the Initia! Vision Scenario exceeds what is planned and likely to occur within the Dublin Town Center and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs. Therefore additional analysis would need to be done. Street improvements and pedestrian enhancements within the . Downtown Dublin Specihc Plan Area PDA would help support and encourage planned transit oriented development within this PDA by making streets and sidewalks more pedestrian friendly. Improvements to the Iron Horse Trail from Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard and the widening of .Dougherty Road to accommodate transit and- bicyclists would encourage and facilitate greater pedestrian and .bicycle access to the Dublin Transit .Center/Dublin Crossings PDA. Additionally, a pedestrian and bicycle bridge overcrossing along the Iron Horse Trail at Dougherty Road and at Dublin Boulevard would increase pedestrian and bicycle safety at these roadway crossings. Page 5 of 7 3) What additional funding would be,needed to support housing growth? The City does not believe that the- Initial Vision Scenario's expected household growth rate is appropriate and recommends That the allocation of housing units be adjusted to align with current City of Dublin Planning documents for each PDA. 4) If the Initial Vision .Scenario growth estimate is too high, should some of the growth be shifted to another part of your jurisdiction, elsewhere in the County or elsewhere in the region? The City of Dublin feels that the Initial Vision Scenario growth estimate exceeds what is planned for the Dublin Town Center and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs and is lower than what is planned. or anticipated for the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings PDA. Some of the development potential could be shifted from the Dublin Town Center and/or Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs to the Dublin Transit- Center/Dublin Crossings PDA; however Dublin's PDAs are not planned to accommodate all of the housing-units the Initial vision Scenario a/locates. The City of Dublin believes the job growth idenfified in the Initial Vision Scenario falls short of the actual potential growfh. The Gity estimated 44,901 jobs at ultimate build out with approximately 17, 994 of those jobs being within PDAs. 5) What are the challenges for your local jurisdiction to attract and retain jobs that match your local workforce? The physical layout of Dublin, as a linear community primarily along the 1-580, lends itself to being attractive for retail uses, Thus retail jobs. This is in stark contrast to the housing stock and real estate prices in Dublin, which attract a skilled, high wage workforce that exceeds what the market can provide in retail-oriented jobs. With respect to the market for office development, Dublin sits between two of the largest business parks in Norttiem California with ample space to accommodate users.. However, Dublin has found a niche with a limited amount of campus office and corporate office for businesses wanfing visibility that comes with being located along I-580. When it comes to industrial ?ands, the . land values and development fees are .generally too high to support construction of large scale industrial development. - Next Steps - At the City Council's direction, Staff will send a letter to ABAG and MTC in response to their request for input from local elected officials on the Initial Vision Scenario. The input will be used by ABAG and MTC as they prepare the Detailed Scenario which is the next step in the development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. The Detailed Scenario will be released in June/July 2011 and will be followed by a Locally Preferred Scenario in August/September 2011; the Locally Preferred Scenario will become the land use plan that is adopted as part of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. Page 6 of 7 . The Alameda County Transportation Commission (Ala~i-meda CTC) has also been soliciting input from Staff to inform the Detailed Scenario in an effort to coordinate the Countywide Transportation Plan and Transportation Expenditure Plan with the Sustainable Communities Strategy. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: This is an informational report to the City Council at the request of the Association of Bay Area Governments to receive input from elected officials on the Sustainable Communities Strategy Initial Vision Scenario. An informational report is not subject to a public hearing and therefore a public notice is not required. As the lead agencies, the Association of Bay Area Governments and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission have been conducting public outreach in the development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Initial Vision Scenario for Public Discussion dated March 11, 2011. 2. Dublin Town Center Priority"Development Area Map. 3: Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings Priority Development Area Map: - ~ . 4. Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Priority Development Area Map: 5. Bay Area Priority Development Area Map. 6. Vacant Housing Sites within the Dublin Town Center PDA. 7. Draft Response letter to ABAG and MTC. G: ISCS- Sustninnble Communities Strnte~ICCb'R'sICC Mtg 05.17)/ICCSR SCS 1~S 05.I7. t l.doc Page 7 of 7 l o-~ ~ x ~ ~ i ~ y ~ T } 4 ~ ~ u 1 1 St ~ r ~ t ~ ' _ r"~ ? ~ l 'y t t v_ ~ v. y1~ ~ ~ ~ f , ~ 1 ~ J I ~ ~ 1 --~-_I~_, ~ flL~ i r Y!^ for Public Discussion ~::~1 , irl ~ L J~ T - ..r/ AT'~'A~~][t~l[]EI~1'IC 1 ° ~ar~ Initial Vision Scenario . for Public Discussion ' March 11, 2011 ME"1'ROPOI,ITAN TRANSPORTAT'ION ' CO;~IdIISSION Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4700. 510.817.5700 tel • 510.817.5848 fax 510.817.5769 tty/tdd ~ ' ~mn ~f ~ffi~y A 4~0 ,Qn&~ Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 8th Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 510.464.7900 tel 510.464-7985 fax ~ ' infona,onebayarea.gov a-mail www.onebayarea.gov web - 3®~- i o~ rea • Executive Surr~mary of the Initial Vision Scenario In 2008, Senate Bi11375 (Steinberg} was enacted. The state law requires that our Regional Transportation Plan contain a Sustainable Communities Strategy that integrates land-use planning and transportation planning. For the 2~-year.period covered by the Regional • Transportation Plan, the Sustainable Communities Strategy must identify areas within the nine- county Bay Area suffcient.to house all ofthe region's population, including all economic segments of the population. It must also attempt to coordinate the resulting land-use pattern with the transportation network so as to reduce per capita greenhouse-gas emissions from personal- , use vehicles (automobiles and light trucks). The Initial Vision Scenario for Plan Bay Area is a first-cut proposal that identifies the areas where the growth in the region's population might be housed. This proposal builds upon a rich legacy of integrative planning in the Bay Area. For over a decade, the region and its local governments have been working together to locate new housing in compact forms near jobs, close to services and amenities, and adjacent to transit so that the need to travel long distances by . personal vehicle is reduced. Compact development within the existing urban footprint also takes development pressure off the region's open space and agricultural lands. We have referred.to this type of efficient development as "focused growth," and the regional program. that supports it is called FOCUS. Planning for New Housing and Supporting Infrastructure The Initial Vision Scenario is constructed by looking first at the Bay Area's regional housing needs over the next 2~ years. This analysis was performed using demographic projections of household growth. It is not a forecast of the region; 'and does not take into account many factors that, constrain the region's supply of new housing units, such as limitations in supporting infrastructure, affordable housing subsidies, and market factors. The principal purpose of the Initial Vision Scenario is to articulate how the region could potentially grow over time in a sustainable manner, and to orient policy and program development to achieve the first phases of implementation. Under the assumptions of the Initial Vision Scenario, the Bay Area is anticipated to grow by over 2 million people, from about 7,350,000 today to about 9,430,000 by the year 203. This population growth would require around 902,000 new housing units. The Initial Vision Scenario proposes where these new units might be accommodated. In a departure from previous regional growth scenarios, this Initial Vision Scenario is designed around places.for growth identified by local jurisdictions. These places are defined by their character, scale, density, and the expected housing units to be built over the long term. U"sing "place types," areas with similar characteristics and physical and social qualities, ABAG asked local governments to identify general development aspirations for areas within their jurisdictions. These places were mostly the Priority Development Areas (PDAs) already identified through the Initial Vision Scenario Page i FOCUS program. They also included additional Growth Opportunity Areas, some similar to PDAs and others with different sustainabiliTy criteria. Based on local visions, plans and growth estimates, regional agencies distributed housing growth across the region, focusing on PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas. ABAG in some cases supplemented the local forecast with additional units based on the typical characteristics of the relevant locally-selected place Type. ABAG also distributed additional units to take advantage of significant existing and planned transit investment, and it assigned some units to locally .identified areas that present regionally significant development opportunities for greater density. The Initial Vision Scenario accommodates 97 percent of new households within the existing urban footprint. Only 3 percent of the forecasted new homes require "greenfield development" (building on previously undeveloped lands). Priority .Development Areas and Growrth Opportunity Areas contain about 70 percent of the total growth (743,000 households). Among counties, three.take the lion's share of growth: Santa Clara, Alameda and Contra Costa absorb a little over two-thirds of the total. These same counties also are anticipated to take the majority of the region's job growth (64 percent). The region's three major cities do a lot of the heavy lifting. Thirty-two percent of the forecast and proposed housing growth occurs in San Jose, San Francisco and Oakland. Seventeen percent goes to medium-sized cities like Fremont, Santa Rosa, Berkeley,.Hayward, Concord, and Santa Clara. The analysis embodied in the Initial Vision Scenario is founded on the location of housing. Employment forecasting and distribution in this Scenario is not directly related to land use policy. Employment location can have a powerful influence on travel demand; vehicle miles traveled, and vehicle greenhouse-gas emissions. In light of these factors and considering economic competitiveness, transit sustainabiliTy, and a balanced relationship between employment and housing, regional agencies will be embarking, with local partners; on further analysis regarding appropriate employment locations in relation to future housing growth and the transportation network. This will. inform the development of the Detailed Scenarios. The initial Vision Scenario reflects the transportation investments from MTC's current Regional Transportation Plan (known as the Transportation 2035 Plan) with an Express Lane backbone system. It also includes some proposed improvements to the region's transit network. These .include increased frequencies on over 70 local bus and several express bus routes, improved rail headways on BART, e;BART, Caltrain, Muni Metro, VTA light-rail, and Altamont Commuter Express, and more dedicated bus lanes in San Francisco and Santa Clara counties; all resulting in overall growth in transit capacity. However, the Bay Area's transit system is fnancially . unsustainable with operators unable to afford to run the current service levels into-the future, ~ . much less expanded headways contemplated under the Initial Vision Scenario. MfiC's Transit Sustainability Project will propose a more sustainable transit system for inclusion in the Detailed Scenarios to be tested. Measuring Performance Against Targets The Initial Vision Scenario results in a 12 percent per capita greenhouse gas emissions reduction from personal-use vehicles in 2035, compared to a 2005 base year. This reduction falls short of Initial Vision Scenario Page 2 i ~ ~ the region's state-mandated 15 percent per capita greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. It's clear that additional strategies will need to be employed if we want to attain the greenhouse gas targets, "and other targets previously adopted by ABAG and MTC. MTC and ABAG have adopted a set of Plan Bay Area performance targets to describe in specific, measureable terms the region's commitment and progress toward to the "three E" principles of sustainability (Economy, Environment, and Equity). The Initial Vision Scenario . meets several regional targets, including accommodating all the projected housing need by income level (in other words, no more in-commuting by workers who live in other regions); reducing the financial burden of housing and transportation on low-income households by providing more affordable housing; and housing the majority of now development within the existing urban core. Also, more residents are projected to ride transit, walk and bike more than existing residents because much of the new housing is located close to services, amenities and jobs, and adjacent to transit in complete communities. The Initial Vision Scenario brings more residents into the region, thus increasing the total amount of travel. Some residents will still drive for some trips. Even though vehicle miles traveled per capita in the Bay Area are projected to be lower in the Initial Vision Scenario than it is today, total miles driven within the region is projected to increase. With more Bay Area _ Residents and more miles driven within the region, we can also expect an increase in the total number of injuries and fatalities. Health impacts from exposure to particulate emissions from automobiles and trucks are likewise projected to worsen with more driving; however, state and federal efforts to clean up heavy duty truck engines will more than off-set the increases from automobiles; resulting in overall reductions sooty particulate pollution. Finally, it must be said .that while bringing more people into the Bay Area will increase the amount of driving and collisions within the region, it is still a net win in the larger sense..The amount of overall driving and greenhouse gas emissions statewide is certainly less than if the new residents were commuting to Bay Area jobs from communities in neighboring regions that do not offer such amenities. Next Steps The Initial Vision Scenario is offered as basis for discussion with local governments, stakeholders, anal the general public about how the Bay Area can accommodate all its population growth over the next quarter century. It is by no means a fait accompli. Over the next several months we will seek input through elected official briefings, local government staff discussions, and public workshops. The.comments received will assist ABAG and MTC in developing a . range of Detailed Scenarios and testing feasible land-use/transportation alternatives that achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. . The purpose of the SCS is to forge consensus in the Bay E1rea on a preferred long-term regianwide growth pattern. Under SB 375, local governments are explicitly not required to update their general. plans in accordance with the SCS. The SCS does not carry the same authority as Regional Housing Needs Allocation but it will inform the distribution of housing at the local level. The adopted SCS land development pattern will help guide regional policies and investments that are made pursuant to the .Regional Transportation Plan. These regional policies Initial Vision Scenario Page 3 ~o-r ion- . and investments are intended to create financial and other incentives to implement the adopted land pattern in the SCS. ABAG is currently working with its l-lousing Methodology Committee to develop a methodology for distributing regional eight-year housing targets to Bay Area local jurisdictions; the methodology will be adopted by ABAG later this year. The Initial Vision Scenario kicks off atwo-year conversation among local jurisdictions and regional agencies on what ultimately will become the forecasted Sustainable Communities Strategy, as a part of Plan Bay Area. During that time, the regional agencies will engage local agencies and the public to help identify and assess several detailed Sustainable Communities Strategy scenarios that demonstrate ways that land=use strategies, transportation investments, pricing and other strategies could achieve our adopted goals and targets. The scenarios also will need to address how the Bay Area's land use plans can assist adaptation to climate change. The Sustainable Communities Strategy will need to coordinate regional agencies' initiatives and requirements related to sea-level rise, air quality, and other climate change related .issues. These .Detailed Scenarios will lead to selection of a preferred scenario early next year that would include an integrated transportation investment and land-use plan; this plan would also undergo a detailed environmental impact review that local agencies could use to streamline environmental assessments of their own local development projects as provided for in SB 375. Finally, the ABAG and MTC boards would be asked to adopt the complete Plan Bay Area, including a Sustainable Communities Strategy, by April 2013. This report includes five major sections. First, the introduction describes the development rationale for the .Initial Vision Scenario and regional and local challenges. Second, the regional grotivth section describes the overall population, household, and employment growth, household distribution under the Initial Vision Scenario, the performance of this scenario against targets, and the preliminary results of an equity analysis. Third, the regional growth analysis is developed into narratives for each county. Fourth, the key priorities and potential strategies section describes the preliminary tools to be considered for the implementation of the proposed development. Fifth, the next steps section describes the process of interaction with local jurisdictions and stakeholders and the analytical tasks for the Detailed Scenarios. The appendix includes a glossary that defines the terms used throughout the report and a table describing the place types. Initial Vision Scenario Page 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 Coordination of regional strategies 9 1.2 Initial Vision Scenario Rationale 10 1.3 . Meeting local and regional challenges 19 2. REGIONAL. GROWTH BY 2035 25 2.1 Historical Trends and Current Regional Plans Forecast 26 2.2 Housing Distribution by 2035 28 2.3 Employment Distribution by 203~ 34 2.4 Evaluation oflnitial Vision Scenario 39 2.4.1 Performance Targets 39 2.4.2 Equity Assessment 42 3. COUNTY VISION SCENARIOS 44 4. KEY PRIORITIES AND POTENTIAL STRATEGIES 81 4.1 Key Priorities 81 4.2 Potential Strategies 82 5. SCS NEXT S"fEPS 84 5.1 Initial Vision Scenario Outreach Process 84 5.2 Development of Detailed Scenarios 8b 6. APPENDIX ...............:..........:...........................................-------.....................................:.:......87 6.1 Glossary ofTerms 87 6.2 MTC Station Area Planning Manual Place Type Identification Matrix 94 LIST OF TABLES, MAPS, AND FIGURES. Tables Table 2.1: Initial Vision Scenario -Regional Growth 2010-2q3~ ............................................2~ Table 2.2: Initial Vision Scenario -Total households and Household Growth by County .....29 Table 2.3: Initial Vision Scenario -Total Jobs and Jvb Growth by County .............................3~ " Table 2.4: Initial Y'ision Scenario -Household and Job Totals and Growth by .Iitri'sdiction...36 Table 2.5: Performance Target Results fvr the Initial Vision Scenario .....................................41 Table 2.6: Results of Equity Analysis of Performance Targets for the Initial Vision Scenariv.42 Table 3.1: Initial Vision Scenario -Total Households and Household GYOwth.by County and Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas 44 Initial Vision Scenaria Page 5 • Tahle 3.2: Alameda County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 201 D-203 j for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction ........48 Table 3.3: Contra Costa Cozenty Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 201 D-2035 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportzenity Areas by Jurisdiction .........53 Table 3.4: ltilarin County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-2035 for - Priority Development Areas and Growth Opporticnity Areas by Jurisdiction .........57 Table 3.1: Napa County Initial vision Scenario household Growth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas by Jurisdiction .............................................................60 Table 3.6: San Francisco City and County Initial Vision Scenario household Growth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportamity Areas .........63 - Table 3.7.~ San Mateo County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction .........67 Table 3.8: Santa Clara County Initial VISIOn Scenarzo Household Growth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction 71 'T'able 3.9: ,Solano County Initial Vision Scenario Household Grotivth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jzrisdiction .........76 Table 3,10: Sonoma County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010- 2035 for Priority Development AI•eas and Grotivth Opportuunity Areas by Jurisdiction .........80 Maps Map 2.1: .Place types for Priority Development Areas and Grotivth Opportccnity Areas in the San I~'rancisco Bay Area 30 Map 3.1: Alameda County PlaceTypes for Priority Development Areas• and Growth Opportunity Areas ....................................:...................,.......................47 11~1ap 3.2: Contra Costa Cvunty Place 'T'ypes fvr Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas ................................................................................52 .Map 3.3: .Maria County Place Types for Priority Development.Areas and Growth Opportunely Areas ................................................................................56 Map 3.4: Napa County Priority Development Area Place Type ..............................................59 .Map 3.5: San Francisco City and County Place Types for Priority Development Areas 62 Map 3.6: San Mateo County Place Types for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas ................................................................................66 Map 3.7: Santa Clara County PlaceTypes for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas ......................................:.......:................................70 Map 3.8: Solano County Place Types for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas 75 Initial Vision Scenario Page 6 Map 3.9: Sonoma County Place Types for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas 79 Figures Figure 2.1: Regional Household Growth 1.990-2035 ...............................................:..................27 Figure 2.2: Regional Job Growth 1990-2035 ..................................:...........................................27 Figure ~.1: SCS Planning Process and Timeline .........................................................................85 Initial Vision Scenario Page 7 l~o~" t~~ 1. INTROllUCTION Senate Bill 375, passed in 2008, calls upon the San Francisco Bay Area and other regions throughout California to incorporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS} that identifies a land use pattern into the federally-mandated 25-year Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The 2013 RTP will be the Bay Area's first plan that is subject to SB 375 and is referred to by ABAG and M:fC as Plan Bay Area. The SCS seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provide. housing for the region's future population by integrating the forecasted development pattern with the regional transportation network and policies. The greenhouse gas reduction target for the Bay Area is a 7 percent per capita reduction by 2020 and a 15 percent per capita reduction by 2035. SB 375 also s}mchronizes the legal requirement known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process with the RTP process and streamlines California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA} for housing and mined-use projects that"meet specified criteria outlined in the bill. The Initial Vision Scenario .identifies gland use pattern to meet the Bay Area's housing targets established under SB 375. This Scenario provides a rationale for a sustainable development vision based on the character, scale, and quality of diverse places in the region, and is measured for environmental, social, and economic performance. It builds upon the work done by local communities.to identify Priority Development Areas.(PDAs) and Priority Conservation Areas (.PCAs) through the FOCUS program. The proposed distribution of housing focuses on areas identified by local jurisdictions that are pedestrian and transit accessible. This focused grourth reduces development pressure from the urban periphery and ensures the retentiori of open space and agricultural land in the Bay Area. 'The Initial Vision Scenario assumes a strong economy and a substantial public investment in affordable housing, public infrastructure, and high quality transit. The operating assumption of the Initial Vision Scenario is that all issues that prevent growth from occurring in fhe urbanized core are substantially resolved,`including adequate public infrastructure, appropriate- management of hazards and risks, .sufficient transit headtivays, redevelopment and affordable housing funding, quality schools, f seal solvency, and the removal of market barriers to private development. With these assumptions, the Initial Vision Scenario proposes to meet the housing needs of the Bay Area in locations that are appropriate both for local governments and for . sustainable development. The release of this Initial Vision Scenario report represents the first step in the Sustainable Communities Strategy process,. as regional agencies seek specific input from local elected " officials and other stakeholders about the future growth pattern in the. Bay Area. Input on the Initial Vision Scenario will be gathered through multiple local and regional forums through May 2011. This input will inform the range of development options to be considered in the. Detailed Scenarios. Further public engagement will be sought on the results of this analysis which will lead to the release of a Preferred Scenario for the SCS by January 2012. The SCS Preferred Scenario will be adopted as part of the Regional Transportation Plan by 2013. Initial Vision Scenario ~ ~ Page S The purpose of the SCS is to forge consensus in the Bay Area regarding the long-term growth pattern and identify the issues associated with its implementation. The Sustainable Communities Strategy, when eventually adopted by the regional agencies, will not impose a binding land use authority on local govemments. Under SB 37.5, local governments are explicitly not required to update their general plans in accordance with the SCS. nor use the SCS as part of their cumulative CEQA analysis of development projects. -T'he SCS does not carry the same authority as RHNA, but it will inform the distribution of housing at the local level. The adopted SCS land development pattern will help guide regioral policies and investments that are made pursuant to the Regional Transportation Plan. These regional policies and investments are intended to create . ' financial and other incentives to implement the adopted land pattern in the SCS. Five major sections organize the content of this report. This introduction section includes the rationale for the development of the scenario and the regional challenges and.needs associated with it. The second section focuses on regional growth. It describes the overall population, household, and employment growth; the distribution of housing and employment at the county, city, and place level; and the evaluation of this scenario against adopted targets and results of the- preliminary equity analysis. The third section takes the regional growth analysis as the basis for a narrative of the initial Vision Scenario in each county. 1'he fourth section describes the ke}~ priorities and potential strategies to lie considered for the implementation of the proposed development. The fifth section outlines the next steps in the process of interaction with local jurisdictions and stakeholders and the analytical tasks for the development of the Detailed Scenarios. The appendix includes a glossary that defines the terms used throughout the report and the NITC Station Area Planning Manual Place Type Development Guidelines Table. 11 Coordination of regional strategies Since, by federal law the RTP must be infernally consistent, the over $200 billion of transportation investment typically included in the RTP must align with and support the adopted SCS land use pattern. The transportation investment strategy included in this Initial Vision Scenario relies primarily on the Transportation 2035 Plan with some improvements in the level of service provided by transit. Regional agencies will work closely with the Congestion Management Agencies (CMAs), transit agencies, and local jurisdictions, along with stakeholders and members of the public to define transportation projects that may better serve the development pattern of the Initial Vision Scenario. The project performance assessment, a • qualitative and quantitative assessment of projects proposed for inclusion in the RTP, will help determine which transportation projects ale included in the Detailed Scenarios. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) prepared by A.BAG must be consistent with the SCS. Both the SCS and RHNA require consideration of housing needs by income group. , RHNA, however, must meet specific legal equity and housing type requirements including a shift towards a more equitable distribution oflow-income housing and a mix of housing types, tenure, and affordability in all cities and counties. This Initial Vision Scenario provides a point of reference to the housing needs for the RHNA. Additional demographic and housing analysis will inform the specific. forecast for RHNA and the Detailed Scenarios. This Initial Vision Scenario assumes the availability of tools, resources, and mitigation strategies that address the impacts of the CEQA thresholds and~guidelines recently approved by the Bay Initial Vision Scenario Page 9 ~20~~~~ Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the policy recommendations encompassed in the Bay Plan prepared by the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BC.DC).:In the Initial Vision Scenario, neither ofthese agencies' guidelines were used to constrain growth in the urbanized core of the Bay Area. 1.2 Initial Vision Scenario Rationale The Initial Vision Scenario identifies a land use pattern to meet the housing target adopted by ABAG and .MTC. To support the projected level of future growth, this. scenario assumes strong regional economic performance and sufficient funding for affordable housing, transportation and the planning and infrastructure dollars needed to support transit-oriented and infill development in the Bay Area. In a departure from previous regional growth scenarios, this Initial Vision Scenario is designed around places for growth identified by local jurisdictions. These places are organized info place types that are defined by their character, scale, density, and the housing units expected over the long term. The Initial Vision Scenario supports cities that are choosing to advance local goals and to improve quality of life by providing affordable housing and transportation choices that help to reduce automobile dependency. It connects local neighborhood priorities in creating high quality places to live and work with regional objectives and resources. Initial Vision Seenurio Objectives In addition to the regionally adopted performance targets listed on page 32, the following objectives guide the Initial Vision Scenario. ~ . 1. Strengthening the character of places through sustainable development The Bay Area encompasses a wide range of places that vary in character, scale, activities, population, and access. The Initial Vision Scenario pursues a sustainable development pattern that enhances the qualities of each place and provides diverse housing types and transportation choices as defined by each community. This scenario proposes to strengthen the physical, social, and economic qualities of various neighborhoods and centers according to each area's selected place type. 2. accommodating affordable housing and employment centers within the urban footprint The Initial Vision Scenario proposes growth within the region's urban footprint around the regional transportation network. This approach builds upon previous and current efforts developed by local jurisdictions and regional agencies to enhance the qualities of selected urban centers, towns, neighborhoods, or transit corridors. .This approach recognizes the need to produce affordable housing, maximize the use of existing infrastructure, and reduce the use of the automobile. In contrast to previous trends, greenfield development is minimized to retain the open space and agricultural land of the region. 3. Location of future housing and jobs next to transit; amenities, and services The development of "complete communities" in the Initial Vision Scenario assumes access to services and amenities at the appropriate urban scale. Schools, shops, parks, ' Initial Vision Scenario Page.10 health services, and restaurants close to residents and workers increase walking, biking, and transit while reducing driving. This location pattern strengthens the identity and diversity of places and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. 4. _ ,Strengthening regional transit corridors to provide access to jobs and services The. Initial Vision Scenario emphasizes growth along transit corridors to increase transportation options, improve mobility, and expand access to jobs and services. The distribution of growth recognizes the complementary functions of different nodes along the corridor, and the importance of cultivating and connecting diverse place types that provide a unique urban quality with a particular mix of shops, services, or amenities. 5. Preservatior~ of land for open .space and agriculture The Bay Area's greenbelt of agricultural, natural resource, and open space lands is a treasured asset that contributes to the region's quality of life, and supports economic development. The Initial Vision Scenario supports.the retention of these lands by directing nearly all non-agricultural development within the urban footprint and. by supporting the continuation of agricultural activities in rural communities. The :Initial Vision Scenario builds upon existing efforts in many Bay Area jurisdictions to encourage more focused and.compact growth that reflects the unique characteristics of the region's communities and neighborhoods. Priority Development Areas (PDAs) are urban neighborhoods or centers that can accommodate future housing close to transit. They are designated by local jurisdictions and adopted by ABAG. PDAs cover a wide range of areas from downtown Cloverdale, to the :El Camino Real transit corridor on the Peninsula, to downtown San Jose. Growth Opportunity Areas are places that might be PDAs in the future or have different criteria to pursue sustainability focused on employment or town center characteristics. They have been proposed by local jurisdictions for inclusion in the Initial Vision Scenario. Concentration of growth in these areas also supports retention of Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs), locally identifed regionally significant near term conservation priorities adopted by ABAG in 2008. ' Input from focal Jurisdictions Many Bay Area jurisdictions have worked in partnership with MTC and ABAG to plan and advance the implementation of PriorityDevelopment Areas as complete communities in recent years..The planning processes for these key inft]l, transit-oriented neighborhoods are often painstaking and involve a complex range of issues. The Initial Vision Scenario is structured to serve as a tool to advance dialogue around a more sustainable regional growth pattern that recognizes local. aspirations and the unique characteristics of our region's neighborhoods and communities: In November 2010, MTC and ABAG requested that local jurisdictions provide input regarding the capacity for sustainable growth in PDAs or new Growth Opportunity Areas. This information supplemented the extensive PDA Assessment undertaken by ABAG and MTC in the prior year. IVlost local jurisdictions provided input on place types and levels of growth. Regional. agencies have used local estimates of growth and adopted local plans to meet the housing target to the extent possible. However, -for discussion purposes, some.Priority Development Areas or Initial Vision Scenario Page 11 ~ y ~ ~-t p ~ ' new Growth Opportunity Areas have been allocated some additional housing units in this scenario. . Transportation Network Assumptions In defining the transportation component of the Initial Vision Scenario, MTC first examined the change in the population forecasts between the Initial Vision Scenario and the Current Regional Plans Forecast. In areas of growth; transit frequencies were increased. MTC also solicited input from the Bay Area Congestion Management Agencies (C.MAs), receiving detailed information regarding transit improvements from San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Alameda counties. Projects received from the CMAs that were consistent with the Initial Vision Scenario's land use patterns were included. Relative to the Current Regional Plans Forecast transportation nerivork, the Initial Vision Scenario network includes:. • Improved headways on over 701oca1 bus routes and several express bus routes; • Improved headways on BART, eBART, Calti•ain, Muni Metro, VTA light rail, and Altamont Commuter Express; and, • Sixty miles of dedicated bus lanes in San Francisco and Santa Clara counties. Housing Distribution To determine how much growth an area could accommodate, regional staff evaluated a Priority Development Area's or Growth Opportunity Area's location in the region., access to employment; proximity to transit or major transit corridors, and overall size and development intensity. This evaluation was framed by the characteristics of the place type selected by the local jurisdiction. A place type groups neighborhoods or centers with similar sus'tainability characteristics and physical and social qualities, such as the scale of housing and commercial buildings, frequency and type oftransit, quality of the streets, concentration of jobs, and range of services. Transit investments and the regional role of a given area were also considered in the distribution of housing. The .following criteria were used to distribute housing growth throughout the Bay Area: 1. Locally identified growth in existing Priority Development Area or new Growth Opportunity Area 2.. Additional housing units based upon the identified characteristics of the locally selected place type for an area Greater housing density proximate to significant transit investment (Existing Transit and Resolution 3434) 4. Major mixed-use corridors with high potential for transit-served infill development. Initial Vision Scenario Page 12 s - Place Type Frarrtework Local jurisdictions used the place types developed by the Center for Transit Oriented Development for Priority .Development Area planning purposesl (Station Area Planning Manual 2007). For the Initial Vision Scenario, place types are a tool for local-regional exchange to identify places and policies for sustainable development. Place types help local governments- . describe appropriate levels of growth in the Sustainable Communities Strategy. The place types are based upon national standards for transit-oriented neighborhoods and corridors. They offer local governments a way to identify their vision for the future of an area, based on building characteristics related to the scale of the place, type. of transit,.the mix of land uses, the intensity of development, retail characteristics, amenities, design guidelines, and major planning and development challenges. These place type characteristics outline a proposed mix of housing types, targets for total housing units and jobs, net densities for new housing, and . minimum Floor Area Ratios (FARs) for new employment development. (See Appendix 6.2) While the place types emphasize the specific context of a particular place, they also take into account the network oftransit-served areas in the region. In this way, the place types provide a common language for a regional policy framework that relates to planning and implementation occurring of the local level. Local .jurisdictions have identified place types for their Priority Development Areas and for new Growth Opportunity Areas. Most local jurisdictions selected place types from the Station Area Planning Manual. A few local jurisdictions proposed alternative place types to better describe their area's vision. The place Types included in the Initial Vision Scenario are summarized below. Place Types from Station Area Planning Manual Regional Center r-- ~ ~ l4 ~ d~ ~ v i 11 ~s~ ~ q a ?~~a - Ni ~ ~ n i .>~i ,i I 4 I r ~f ~ ~ _ ~ r ~ i ] ~t3S9lf ry i ' Jx ~ gi S ~ ~,'rit~~Y ~ a ~ - - - ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ > 1 The entire manual can be downloaded from the MTC wehsite at http://www.mtc.ca.kov/planning/smart Growth/stationslSta±ion Area Plannine Manual Nov07,odf Initial Vision Scenario Page 13 Iton~t0`~ Regional centers are primary centers of economic and cultural activity for the region. They have . a dense mix of employment, housing, retail and entertainment. They are served by a rich mix of transit modes and types and local-serving bus networks. Examples of regional centers inchide the downtown areas in San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland. City Center ' i I l j73 ~ 7 f ~yF~Y" s ' e V i s l r + r ~ . d i # ~ w ~r ~ - , i'g ~ ~ ~i. Cit3r centers contain a mix of residential, employment, retail, and entertainment uses. 'They are magnets for surrounding areas while also serving as commuter hubs to. the region. They retain their historic character in the structure of their street networks and buildings. They are served by multiple transit options including high volume bus or Bus Rapid Transit, as well as local bus routes. Examples of city centers include the downtowns of Fremont, Berkeley, Redwood City, and Santa Rosa. Suburban Center _ - - - - I ~t ~ Z ~ ~ ~ J Suburban centers are similar to city centers but currently have lower densities, less transit, and more parking. These places also include areas that are adding new housing and services to predominantly single-use employment areas.. Suburban centers envision a mix of residential, Initial Vision Scenario Page 14 1. - employment, retail, and entertainment uses. They are both origin and destination settings for commuters, with a mix of transit service connected to the regional network.:Examples of suburban centers include West Downtown Walnut Creek, Downtown Dublin, and I~acienda in Pleasanton. Transit Town Center 9.y i~ ~ - ~ 1 i ~ ~ r ti~, ~~ia ~ ~ ~ ~ . `'r) \ a tom, F i~:a. y1.F-r'_i4 . ~T~.- ~'v~_. f ~ `~y~i•? . , $ f'`r' ?tug-rn jI~ _ t~ .a - r ~ ~ ; r~.Ea ~v ..~..1. ~ ~ ~."z' . _ z ~ -~:~1 - J Transit town centers are local-serving centers of economic aitd community activity. A variety of transit options serve transit town centers, with a mix of origin and destination trips, focusing primarily on commuter service to major employment centers. Examples of transit town centers are the Hercules Waterfront District, the Suisun City Downtown and Waterfront, and Downtown South San Francisco. Urban Neighborhood t-- - - - F,- ~a ~~i 1 _ ~ ~ ~ _ d ~ - . _ r .Z. T - t~ t ~ ~ x° _ , - t ~ ~~r I~ y JwE fi i~ s `'J ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F _ 1 - !S c - ~F 1 ktr 1 y ~ ( ` . 1 Urban neighborhoods are primarily residential areas that are well-connected to regional or city . centers. They have moderate-to-high densities, and usually feature local-serving retail mixed in Initial Vision Scenario Page IS . ~g.~-~ o ~ with housing. Commercial and other employment is often limited to small businesses or historically industrial uses. Examples of urban neighborhoods include the Pruitvale District in Oakland, the Woodland/Willow Neighborhood in East Palo Alto, and Mission Bay in San Francisco. Transit Neighborhood ~ r~E ~ ' - t t ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~tr'~`~~ ~~7y t Imo' ~ c_ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ a ~ ~ 1, k ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~a `,e tG a~~`lti! ~ l ~ ~ ~ . R- ~ : ~ y rest ~ rr':, -.a i ~ z 'x t . lr ( ` 1 , ~ '~Pi x _ ~ sS ~ ,a,, ~ v ~_~..wj i ~ V~~-' ~ y' it 3q~,: Transit neighborhoods are primarily residential areas that are served by rail service or multiple bus lines that connect at one location. They have low-to-moderate densities, and the transit stations are often a minor focus of activity. They usually do not have enough residential density to support large retail, but have nodes of retail activity. Examples of transit neighborhoods include Whisman Station in Mountain View, The Cannery in Hayward, Central Hercutes; and Berryessa Station in San Jose. . Mixed-Use Corridor ~ 1~~~ ' , z r - tt-~ ~ ' ~ u - T ry ~ !1. A ~ ~ _ ~i.. Bid i ~ 3t - ~ ~ ~ ~r 6 ~ A.~1,.. y~4 i__ ~ ~ i _ _ initial Vision Scenario page 16 . Streetcars, light rail, bus rapid transit, orhigh-volume bus corridors can serve Mixed-Use Corridors. These encompass a mix of amoderate-density buildings housing services, retail, employmen#, and civic or cultural uses. Existing mixed-use corridors include Telegraph Avenue- International Boulevard-Mission Boulevard in Alameda County, San Pablo Avenue in the East Bay, Mission-San Jose Corridor in San Francisco, and El Camino Real on the San Francisco Peninsula: . Other Place Types Recently Identified by Local Jurisdictions: Employment Center ~y ~ ~ ~ ~ y~ ~.w~" vv ~"[c ~ ~ x ~ i _ ~ T I t l 71 rI ~ ~ ~ ~.n ~ Ft ! - i i r'-.ter 3~ ~ i I ~ I ~ a z ~ t . ~ ~ r ~SJs, r .,e- ~ Y'~ i Employment centers are signifcant centers of economic activity that do not have a mix of housing integrated in the area. These areas are served by.. a variety of transit options for commuters and can be enhanced by local-serving retail. Examples of employment centers .include the Sunnyvale Moffett Park and the North Concord BART Adjacent Growth Opportunity Areas. Rural Town Center ~ , •j. ~ , kl--~~ ~I - ~ ~ r ~ _ ~ , i ~ f ~ r r , f~o~ G ~ I~_.,.{ rj ~ k~ ~ J L 1 n ii w` r 1 Initial Vision Scenario _ Page 17 ~oo~~ e Rural town centers are local centers of economic and community activity surrounded by ' agricultural lands. They have the opportunity to integrate moderate-density housing and supporting local-serving retail while retaining scale and improving bicycle and pedestrian access. The Sonoma County Penngrove Urban Service Area Growth Opportunity Areas is an example of a rural town center. Rural Mixed-Use Corridor a i _ t _ ~ _ - r ~ - ,"`j~ z ~ ~ i _ ~ 1 ~ i - rn z} x + ~ i ~ y 173:.-~.,,~i r~ +t ~ 1 1 ~ ~ s _ Rural mixed-use corridors have a local focus of economic and community activity surrounded by agricultural lands: They integrate a mix of uses and provide access to transit and ability to walk or bike along the corridor. The.Springs Growth Opportunity Area in Sonoma County is an example of a rural mixed-use corridor. 1.t~ i_~ tcr, h i ~ r~t it ull:;i thou: i ~rr~, li F•r ~,i ~ ,~i ~~n~~hl h~r~c;ii, t~ il~c I~.i'. ~_Are:r~~~ ~ ~,n_~ntr:~.t~ ~ ~owt~~ ~ te~rtali'r. >un ~ ~,+_,n~,i nui~_i-~~_ Limits greentic9+i 1~. ~~I,~~,n~ent~~, _ ~ RcduCe~ i ptne~i,~~_ ~~iil'ii i~t}'E i _i~~:~.1~~.~ii ~\i~_+ P[GSOrt ;F a icter t =i~l. ~ ~,~.~ci i~nsity +csi~l~~~~ii i~nci~ if +r~~„ ~l, s L~tihzes si fi i~tia~ncit,ii li ~ i ii ~~_n o' \ i i _ . ll_fl?lii I'..~' ~i iilpeU 'I '_C~If :1flt, f('IliCl ~ - - P s ~ 3 i ~ iJ~~ t~~r r ipui;~ ~ i~t senior ~ ~ ~I iti~ n • I : ' ~tndtmprr ~~:sttn ,':uei ~.;~i url ~ iE,i(i~J i~ilydsi+utun_ • - I.,:~.~.~i Eger Capita«..t~_r u,~ Clue ~evel~.~hrr_ni_I~r~~~t~irii;~ uid lo, ail, n ~ iii ~cth linen ,~~,;~I~~n~nerit ~ I„_~~ ~ ~~I~~~ i_i~,i it~~::li ~u~i~~~_:~nd ~~Uic~i.il a-in~it ; • Pro i '~s for 1n iinpro~z~3 re~wnaL•',e i + n ~ ' - . - - _ . Initial Vision Scenario Page 18 Zio~~o~ These Place types define the growth pattern encompassed in the.Initial Vision Scenario, which represents an acceleration of the shift in recent years toward infill development in existing communities rather than Greenfield development and a very different regional growth pattern than the historical trends of the last 25 years.. 1.3 NYeeting local and regional challenges Bay Area cities and counties; along with regional agencies, have identified numerous challenges to creating sustainable development. This section summarizes those challenges around a number of themes. Many of the challenges identified do not fall under the purview of ABAG or MTC, however they provide an important context for developing the SCS and will need to be addressed if this region is to achieve a sustainable development pattern. Economic Recovery ana' Vitality: The recent recession has severely impacted leading industries and triggered a high number of mortgage foreclosures in the Bay Area. The region lost about 200,000 jobs in the last few years, which will likely not be fully recovered until close to 2016. Under the Initial Vision Scenario, the region is expected to produce an average of almost 50,000 jobs per year over the 25-year planning period. This is much higher than the job growth average over the previous 20 years, which was closer to 10,000 jobs per year. Economic restructuring and regional competitiveness are often cited as the reasons for anemic job growth in the Bay Area. The slow economic recovery is compounded by long commutes for many of the Bay Area's workers who travel from locations where the market provided moderate-income housing at affordable levels prior to the current recession. Still, the Bay Area is one of the most successful metropolitan areas in the world, and employment growth will be revived. The Bay Area's innovative industries include key exporting industries and services (technology, life sciences; professional and financial services, tourism, etc) as well as critical assets that keep them competitive (universities; research labs, some outstanding public and private schools). Additionally, the region's diverse population and - unique rnix of entrepreneurial culture and innovation allows for risk-taking, innovative financing, and the adaptive re-allocation of our resources (facilities, workforce, and capital). The SCS should consider a sustainable economic development strategy that accompanies land use and transportation planning. Building on initiatives that have been undertaken throughout the Bay Area, the SCS seeks to enhance the region's prosperity and job production while at the same time improving its environmental integrity and quality of life. Connecting people to work, school, recreation, and commerce is a key aspect of ahigh-functioning Sustainable Communities Strategy. The SCS should link the Bay Area's existing and projected employment patterns {by industry, occupation, and income level) with housing markets and affordability in order to effectively reduce GHG emissions and increase the stock of affordable housing. Some areas of the region have established "Green Corridors" or `Emerald Cities'' where a variety of economic development initiatives are underway. These initiatives cluster and support "clean tech" businesses that supply energy- or resource-efficient products or services. Economic development strategies should include assisting these firms with space needs and investment capital, as well as job development and support for local entrepreneurship. Programs such as these connect green and clean tech businesses with underserved communities and assist low- and lni#ial Vision Scenario Page l9 moderate-income employees and residents with money-saving efficiencies in housing and transport. A regional economic development strategy could support the land uses included in the - SCS and bring more economic vitality to these areas. Another important economic development strategy that needs to be addressed in the SCS is the support of goods movement in the Bay Area. Industrial land supply for goods movement businesses has been concentrated along the major transportation corridors that ring the central parts of San Francisco Bay, and some of these locations are proximate to I DAs that are expected to accommodate housing growth. Industrial land supply in the inner :Bay Area is declining while goods movement industries and their demand for central locations are growing. Shortages of industrial land result in the outward dispersion of industrial activities. Due to the region's geography and freeway system, the demand shifting outward will be heavily focused on industrial locations with access into the central Bay Area markets they serve via Interstate 580, Interstate 80, and [J.S. Highway 101. SCS policies should take into account these trends and find policy incentives to support the retention of existing industrial land. Restoration of Hoarsing Markets: The Bay Area was impacted by the mortgage lending crisis and - there are numerous areas where foreclosure activity will continue at much higher than historical rates. Foreclosures suppress the housing construction market and impact the willingness of potential new buyers to invest in purchasing new units. The foreclosure crisis significantly impacted many of the jurisdictions in the eastern part of the region. These steep value declines in many parts of the Bay Area essentially stopped most housing production. The foreclosure crisis dropped home values in many neighborhoods and drastically decreased the funding available for new housing-for both families and developers. Most local jurisdictions will probably not experience a regular flow of housing project permits for several years. The steep decline of the housing market has severely impacted the cities, counties, and special districts that are responsible for the implementation of the SCS. Many cities have been forced to reduce staff in planning and economic development departments. In the short term, public agencies will be stretched to implement local plans when the market begins to recover and projects are once again under way. Despite the challenges to the current housing market, the demographic trends and likelihood for economic growth in the Bay Area mean that over the long haul, housing markets will return to - health. Demand for housing is expected to be particularly high in areas that are pedestrian- and transit-oriented, which will facilitate future growth in P:DAs. Climate Adaptation: The SCS also will need to address how the Bay Area's land use plans can assist adaptation to climate change. Much of the region's key infrastructure, including airports. and key expanses of highways close to the Bay are subject to sea-level rise. Our region will need to protect this vital infrastructure, and be prepared to address some of the other byproducts of climate change, such as worsening air quality, drinking water shortages and greater likelihood of events like the Oakland I-Iills firestorm. Supporting Infrastructure: To support the increased housing, the Initial Vision Scenario reflects the transportation investments from the Transportation 203 Plan with an Express .Labe backbone system. It also includes some initial proposals to improve the region's transit network, Initial Vision Scenario Page 20 ~~,,~i~~ ,all resulting in overall growth in transits capacity. However, the Bay Area's transit system is financially unsustainable with operators unable to afford to run the current service levels into the future, much less expanded services. MTC's Transit Sustainability Project will propose a more sustainable transit system for inclusion in the Detailed Scenarios to be tested. Changing Demographics: By 2035,.our senior population will represent an increasing share of the overall population. Growth in the 65-and-over population accounts for almost half of the overall Bay Area population growth. This growth has major implications since many people in this population group have limited incomes and a smaller household size, typically one or two people, lowering the regional household size average down to 2.6 persons per household. The increasing diversity of our region also presents a different set of housing needs. Over the last t~vo decades, Latino and Asian populations have increased by more than a third, while the proportion of whites have decreased. This trend has implications on the need for housing that can accommodate multigenerational.families and on the location around specific services and cultural nodes. The relocation of the African-American population from inner, transit-served cities to more suburban locations represents a different challenge. While some of this relocation relates to choices, a portion relates to displacement and poor neighborhood qualities. These demographic challenges are compounded by the increasing polarization of our economy between high and low-wage workers and the suburbanization of poverty. The SCS focus on existing neighborhoods could help create a community context for addressing some of these challenges. F,conomic development, job opportunities and better public health outcomes could result from strengthening the urban core v<~ith new development. By capturing the market that exists for infill housing, services can be delivered more efficiently and with greater community resources. Both the senior population and younger knowledge-based workers seek safe, walkable, and. diverse environments that are intended to be built using the principles of complete community planning in PDAs. Funding Affordable Housing Production: While its economic strength and quality of life has made the Bay Area attractive for many people, it also has increased the cost of housing for our diverse population. Our region faces a major challenge in the production of.housing for all life stages, ethnic groups; and income levels. Between l 999 and 2006, the Bay Area as a whole produced only 55 percent of the needed housing units for low and very low income residents, and only 37 percent of the units needed for moderate-income residents, .in contrast with_the 1~3 percent for the above-moderate-income group. This affordable housing challenge is particularly critical in transit-oriented areas and established neighborhoods with high land value and complex planning processes. For low-income households earning less than $3,000 per year, the combined cost of housing and transportation places the vast majority of Bay Area municipalities beyond their reach and makes the Bay Area the most expensive region in the country. Local governments with Planned- PDAs have identified a need for $2.42 billion to support their affordable housing goals in the short-term. Redevelopment agencies, in particular; have played a key role in helping to develop affordable housing in the region over the last 25 years, as redevelopment financing has provided subsidies that support construction of affordable housing. Presently, the existence of redevelopment , agencies is threatened by state legislative action in response to the current budget crisis. The loss Initial Vision Scenario Page 21 of redevelopment agencies would affect the flow of dollars for affordable housing production, One of the key issues the SCS needs to address iS'how to target PDAs for the efficient production of affordable housing at all levels. Improving Neighborhood. Services: The production of housing by itself will not address sustainability unless it is accompanied by the development of complete communities with well- defined destinations. A sustainable approach requires the development of complete communities connected by transit service. Many jurisdictions, however, lack the infrastructure that invites walking, biking and transit use; sidewalks, bike lanes, bus service, retail and entertainment are limited or missing. They also lack good neighborhood services, such as clean parks; good schools and grocery stores. Because schools are a critical housing-choice consideration for households with children, the quality of schools is closely correlated with the potential for market rate housing production. In the .Bay Area, we have a wide range of school districts. 1'he region is home to some of the highest-performing public and private schools in the nation, but there are also many poor performing schools in urban communities where the PDAs would accommodate much of the growth in the initial Vision Scenario. Access to high-quality schools is a primary motivator for families choosing where to live, and schools account for 12 percent of all trips made in the Bay Area. An investment in improvements for urban schools, both in the surrounding neighborhood and in the school itself would reap benefits at the regional scale. Schools that offer innovative, rigorous and supportive programs for a wide range of students, from diverse backgrounds and income levels, are a cornerstone of complete communities. For example, new programs increasing standardized test scores and higher graduation rates at several Bay Area high schools, including Oakland Technical High School, Berkeley High School, and Carlmont High School (Belmont), have made them magnets for families. The SCS can further the achievements of urban schools by investing in safer streets and housing for the surrounding neighborhoods. Effective Planning, Permitting, and Design Tools: The focus on complete communities near transit defines major planning and implementation challenges for local jurisdictions. Beyond the basic planning needs for the development of complete communities, all jurisdictions have highlighted the high. cost and time requirements of the environmental review process for new development. The cost of a neighborhood plan Environmental Impact Report can range from $200,000 to $3 million. In addition, designing buildings and public spaces that enhance the quality and character of the neighborhood requires resources and expertise beyond most local jurisdictions capabilities. Given the increase in density, taller buildings, and mix of activities, in . the development of PDAs, these design resources become essential to create places that meet community expectations. Given the complexity for local government to plan .PDAs, planning funding is a critical need. Increasing the number ofPlanned PDAs that result in complete communities with streamlined permitting is a high priority for the SCS. Existing programs to assist local governments in these, • efforts.could and should be expanded. . Regzslatory Framework: The mix of local, regional, state, and federal regulations that govern housing, commercial, and infrastructure project delivery makes progress toward compact Initial Vision Scenario Page 22 ' ~s~~o~ development both expensive and time-consuming. Rules and policies adopted by various levels . of government such as storm water runoff, air quality, sea level rise, regional traffic impacts, and mitigations under CEQA can each cost a single,project hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct . and indirect costs. The coordination of as many rules as possible to facilitate development consistent with the final SCS will be critical for any meaningful implementation to occur. A key indicator for success of the SCS would be to resolve governmental policy conflicts-with a mitigation package that will eliminate this key barrier. ' Water Supply and Distriba~tion: Future water supply is severely constrained. Many. water sources in the state are already significantly over-appropriated, and traditional storage developments may not be fiscally or environmentally feasible. Accommodating projected growth largely within the current wafer supply can be done, but it will require overcoming Barriers in existing infrastructure to move and store reclaimed water, better use of storm water, and an increase in public acceptance ofalternative-source water supplies. While many local water agencies are making strides toward meeting these outcomes, regional policy alignment is needed so that these efforts are widely pursued around the region and conflicting public policy over recycled and storm water source and use is minimized. "the Bay Area's growth potential will need to be supported by an environmentally sustainable and reliable water supply. The compact growth pattern envisioned in the SCS will help to . minimize the need for new Ions term supply; urban core areas use less water per capita than does _ greenfield development. To achieve a sustainable water supply, new fiorising units will need to be built with state-of-the-art water conservation systems and landscaping. New units will also need to be developed within a framework which improves resiliency from more frequent climate-driven droughts and recognizes the potential for major supply disruptions from earthquake and/or levee failure in the Delta. Agricadtural Lands, Operr Space, habitat Preservation: Given continued population and job growth and a decrease in programs that support the preservation and retention of agricultural lands, pressure to develop farmland and open space will increase. The preservation of farmland and open space can ensure that Bay Area lands will provide clean water, local food, diverse habitats to support a variety of native plants and animals, and recreational opportunities. It fuither presents an opportunity to. remain economically viable by attracting businesses, workers, and visitors that value these lands for their contribution to the quality of life in the Bay Area and to support climate and adaptation strategies by providing places for species to migrate, water to rise; and land for crop diversification. To support the goal of open space and agricultural preservation, the growth pattern in the Initial Vision Scenario maximizes development in the urban footprint, with the benefit of decreasing development pressure on these lands. Hazards and Risks: Our entire region is subject to a variety of natural hazards. The majority of the housing in the SCS would be located primarily along the inner Bay corridors; where there are " substantial short- and long-term risks fiotn sea level rise and earthquake shaking and 'liquefaction. These hazards will result in damage to housing, infrastructure; and loss of economic power. Much progress has already been achieved by retrofitting major infrastructure. Major investments have upgraded the region's toll bridges and freeway overpasses. BART has strengthened its elevated tracks, 20 stations, and the Transbay Tube. Major seismic Initial Vision Scenario - Page 23 2 Lo o ~l D . improvements have been made to the Hetch-Hetchy and Mokelumne aqueduct systems as well as a number of dams and water treatment plants within the region. Local governments have retrofitted or replaced many of their city halls and critical facilities. Additional work to retrofit the region's significant older housing stock; plan for our long-terra post-disaster recovery, and develop a regional sea level rise adaptation strategy will help ensure that the region realizes its vision for. a sustainable future. Efficient Resozrrce .Management: The Sustainable Commtmities Strategy's emphasis on infill development encourages aresource-efficient economy that utilizes innovative programs within the materials management cycle to produce and consume less toxic and more recyclable products. k'rograms such as these improve our individual health and reduce our collective environmental impact. Recycling through.exisfingeollection systems creates processing jobs and encourages development o.f local industries that use recovered materials. Urban infill and high density projects are much more energy- and water-efficient than low-density development, thereby increasing economic resilience against future energy price shocks. [nitial Vision Scenario Page 24 2. REGIONAL GROWTH BY 2035 The Initial Vision Scenario proposes a regional growth pattern to accommodate all the future population'of the region. The lnitial Vision Scenario assumes that there will be a sufficient number of homes to accommodate future population growth and to. provide people coming to work in the Bay Area with a.home in the region. It assumes that there is adequate fitnding for affordable housing. The forecast of future population'and household growth is based on fertility rates, life expectancy, net migration, household formation rates, and employment growth. The doubling of the number ofpeople.aged 65 and older means that more people will be living in small households, living singly or as couples rather than families. Without assuming increases in the share ofmulti-generational and non-family households, this demographic shift will result in more households and a smaller average household size. Employment is expected to grow at a higher rate than that of the nation-and of the Bay Arca in previous decades. The rationale and optimism for this higher growth rate is that the Bay Area economic base is concentrated in sectors likely to lead the nation in job growth, such as professional services and research activities. Additionally, housing all the region's population is assumed to have an impact on employment levels; it will result in both incremental construction employment and incremental employment from consumer spending by the households that are no longer in-commuting from outside the region. Based on these assumptions, the total regional number of households by 203 is estimated at approximately 3.6 million, or 903,000 additional households. The total number of jobs that are forecasted in the region by 2035 is approximately 4.5 million, an increase of approximately 1.2 million from today. Table 2.1: Initial Vision,Scenario -Regional Growth 2010-2035 2010 :2~035~' >2010-2035 Gro uth Households 2,669,800 3,572,300 902,600 Po ulation 7,348,300 9,429,900 2,081,600 Em io ed Residents 3,152,400 4,199,000 1,046,600 Jobs 3,271,300 4,493,300 1,222,000 The distribution of new households focuses on Priority Development Areas (PDAs), Growth Opportunity Areas, and transit corridors. PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas accommodate about 70 percent of the total regional household grotivth. About 97 percent of the total households are within the urban footprint. At the county- level, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa are absorbing a major share of total - increase in the number of households, 621,000 out of the 903,000 total: Compared to these counties, San Mateo adds a smaller number of households but grows at a similar rate, at approximately 36 percent. Slightly more than half of the region's job growth is expected in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 25 ~~~~~fl ~ This spatial pattern of growth pursues a development path that builds. upon recent planning efforts and goals of our local jurisdictions. This path, however, presents an approach that differs from previous development trends and previous forecasts. 2.1 Historical Trends and Current Regional Plans Forecast When compared with historical trends and. the Current Regional Plans Forecast, the Initial Vision Scenario shifts~the growth o.f population toward the transportation network, increasing the . ` density and enhancing the qualities of existing cities and towns. The main regional planning approach.in this scenario is the definition of character and scale of places by local jurisdictions. Between 1980 and 2010, the region saw a major share of its population growth in newly developed greenfieid areas. In the Initial Vision Scenario, 70 percent of the housing is expected to be accommodated in the PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas located close to transit, and only five percent is expected to be developed outside the urban footprint. In contrast to the recent past; when single-family housing development predominated, it is expected that nearly all of the housing within the PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas will be multi-family housing, and that some percentage of housing accommodated in areas outside the PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas will be multi-family as well.. Studies of recent demographic and social trends in various regions across the country and beyond indicate that younger generations prioritize urban amenities over single-family homes in their choices of places to live. ,Access to cafes, restaurants, services, and cultural events around transit has more weight in their choices than do large houses with garages and automobile access. To be clear, suburban development of large houses has not and will not disappear in the immediate fixture. since our diverse population expects a wide range of housing possibilities. However, it should be noted that this choice is not as prevalent as it was in previous decades in the Bay Area. Given the 903,000 households that must be accommodated by 2035, the Initial Vision Scenario assumes a higher production of housing than the region has experienced in previous decades, when the region produced an average of 21,OOO,units per year. The initial Vision Scenario assumes that we will produce about 36,000 units per year, which represents 100 percent of the needed housing. Employment in the Initial Vision Scenario is projected to grow an average of 50,000 jobs per year over the next 25 years. This is a higher job growth rate than the average over the previous 20 years of approximately 10,000 jobs per year, but it is a lower rate than expected prior to the recession. Between 1980 and 2010, the region added 740,000 jobs with most of the growth occurring before 1990. Between 2010 and 2035, the Initial Vision Scenario projects an increase of 1.2 million jobs. This recovers the almost half-million jobs~lost in the past decade and adds an additiona1740,000 jobs. While the regional population and the regional economy have both grown, regional employment has kept a much slower pace, and has had major periods of decline over the past two decades, especially during the recent recession. Figures 2.1 and 2.2 show historical, Current Regional Plans Forecast, and Lnitial Vision Scenario regional household and job growth. Tnitial Vision Scenario ~ Page 26 Figure 2.1: Regional Household Groyvth 1990-2035 ~.5 0 4.5 4 2:5 2 - 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -Historical Trends (ABAG) •-----Current Regional Plans Forecast ---Initial Vision Scenario Figure 2:2: Regional Job Growth 1990-203 5 0 s 4.5 . 3.5 • 3 2.5 2 1990 1995 2DDD 2005 201D 2015 2D20 2025 203D . 2035 -Historical Trends (department of Finance} --:~-Historical Trends (AB~G} Current Regional Plans Forecast --Initial Vision Scenario * The difference bebveen the Historical Trends (Department of Finance) and the Flistorical Trends (,413.4G) reflects certain adjustments beriveen Department of Finance employment figztres and those used for regional modeling purposes, such as for self-employed jobs. Initial Vision Scenario Page 27 _ . 3Do ~ l fl l 2Z. Housing Distribution by 2035 The distribution of housing in the Initial Vision Scenario maximizes development within the Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas along the existing transportation nettivork, three significant inner Bay Area arterial corridors, and three planned rail corridors. This approach is intended to help support transit use and leverage past and future investments.in transit and infill. The existing, extensive transportation nettivork in the Bay Area provides a strong foundation upon which to distribute future growth. Many of the region's PDAs, where infill growth is already being planned, are based around the stations of the major heavy- and light-rail systems- BART, Caltrain, Amtrak, SF Muni, and VTA. The PDAs along these transit corridors serve as nodes that will. connect the majority of the region's housing and jobs by 2035. Additionally, three state arterial highways in the Bay Area-State Routes 185, 82 and 123, known locally as Telegraph Avenue-International Boulevard-Mission Boulevard, EI Camino Real; and San Pablo Avenue-are closely linked to the established transit system, and have high potential for infill housing development. Improved bus service (Bus Rapid Transit) is'planned along these spines, so development of housing along these corridors will leverage the existing transit network to provide better access to job centers around the region, and help to transform auto-oriented corridors into walkable communities. Three planned heavy rail expansion projects -BART to Silicon Valley, BART to Antioch ("eBART"), and Sonoma-Mann Area Rail Transit (S.MART) -provide an opportunity to more efficiently link residents to the region's major job centers. Development of housing along these new corridors will help to ease the Bay Area's chronic housing shortage, improve the cost- effectiveness of the expansions, and help preserve regional open space. Many of the communities along these future transit corridors are already planning for a signifcant amount of new housing at the future stations. Napa County is the only county without existing or planned commuter rail service. Growth in Napa County will be primarily accommodated in the American Canyon PDA and within city centers that utilize local and regional bus service. At the county level, Santa Clara and Alameda Counties will take the largest shares of new households; at 28 percent and 24 percent of the region's total household growth, respectively. San Mateo, San Francisco, and Contra Costa. Counties collectively take on an additional 338,000 new households, or 37 percent of the region's growth. Table 2.2 summarizes the distribution of household growth at the county level. 'The distribution of household grov<~th along corridors and nodes is described more specifically below. Map 2.1 shows the Initial Vision Scenario Place type distribution across the region. Initial Vision Scenario Page 28 a 3 1 Table 2.2:.Initial Vision .Scenario -Total Hoarseholds and Household Growth by County 2010 ~ -20''5 Housef~old j Pe cr ent- Count _ ,Ho_u_sefiolds _Hou_seholds Growth Cha?~ye Alameda ~ 557,700 770,400 212,700. 38.2% Contra Costa 392,700 546,700 154,000 39.2% Marin 106,400 117,100 10,700 10.0% Na a 51,300 56,100 4,800 9.4% San Francisco 346,700 436,800 90,100 26.0% San Mateo 264,500 358,300 93,800 35.5% Santa Glara 613,900 867,800 253,900 41:3% Solano 148,200 187,800 39,600 26.7% Sonoma 188,400 231.400 42.900 22.8% Re Tonal Total _ 669;80©„~~; 3,572,.300'... 90',600 ; 33:8%,:' Between 2010 and 2035, regional centers continue to lead the growth in households in the region. San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland will add 286,000 households, almost one third of the regional total. In each of these cities' downtown areas, this level of growth represents a major change in scale and character, a shift towards high-rise residential buildings, and in outer neighborhoods, higher-density development along transit corridors. At the same time, medium size cities that range from city centers to transit town centers are also assuming major growth responsibilities. Fremont, Santa Rosa, Berkeley, Hayward, Richmond, Concord, and Santa Clara, for example, are adding between 10,000 to 20,000 households. See jurisdiction tables at the end of Section 2.3 for more details about city-wide growth. Growth Along Existing Transportation NetVVOrk San Francisco is an appropriate location for a significant portion of the region's future housing. It has reliable, frequent BART aud.Caltrain service, Muni light rail and bus lines, ferry service, future high-speed rail service, as well as considerable existing commercial and retail density. In 2035, San Francisco as a whole is expected to have 436,800 households, an increase of 90,100 households. .Eighty-one percent of these new households will be in the city's varied PDAs. The Downtown-Van Ness-Geary I?UA, a regional center, will take on the greatest share of growth at 19,000 households, while the Bayview/Hunters Point Shipyard/Candlestick Point P.UA, an urban neighborhood, will contribute 11,200 households. Treasure Island will add 7,200 households, and new 4,100 households are expected in the 1~ransbay Terminal PDA. Along the Peninsula, Caltrain, BART, and Valley Transportation Authorit}' (VIA) rail systems connect numerous communities, as well as the region's two biggest employment centers, San Francisco and San Jose. Many of these systems' stations are within walking distance from >1 Camino Real, or the planned "Grand Boulevard" corridor, which crosses through and connects numerous PDAs around. the downtowns and commercial streets along the Peninsula, from South . . San Francisco in the north, to San Jose in the south. SamTrans and VTA provide frequent bus service along this corridor. Initial Vision Scenario Page 29 Map 2.1: Place Types for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas in the San . Francisco Bay Area _ , ~ ~ - ~ - - . ~~t_- J x m ~ ~i i ~ 3 ti ~ 'mot 1\.r~x { Cunnty ; i, jja ..Svuauts ~ - S Crx~niy i'1 1` ~ Y ; ~ - i y. j ` $ .,.5^~ ~ ,1.uyn I ~ ~ } - P. 1 ~ ~4 ~ , . S - . . i~~~ thy.. '3 5 \ 1 • • a. vS. ' ' a ~ - ~ ~ ~ • ` ~r ~f s Blxrita - r ro c~~,~,tY r - Po 1, - <'ll U13 i_Y A ~ _ t . ~ 1 k ~ as. S ut n ~ ~ I;. F: in Inc ~'s _ ~ i ti ~ ~i ~ . . ~ 'I~ ~i~ ~ _ _\~U.~n icd-~ ~ i :(';mar 1~ ~..ouucy i i x, `r ai # r s , is ~t"~~~„`, ~ «r„~s, ~ ~ ~ ` , ~a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.r ~ ~ ti ; ~ ~ ~ _ ~1.. ~ Sani:f C'Ixra ~ , Q _'..r L er C~a~mty . ~ , ~ ~ _ h y ruC~ as ~ ~ i - - i ' "-w ~ , i - - F i .w.__~.~_,.,.,,_..._.....u.. - - ~ ~ / ~1ace ~'y~e ~o~ ~xg®~at~T Deve~cs~a.~c.~.t ~Y~as ~ - a~-~c~ ~~o~*th ©~~or2bi~:iit~r ~S:e~eas =.ti~,c Initial Vision Scenario Page 30 c 33 °~1~`~ In'San Mateo County, Daly City, Redwood City, San Mateo and South San Francisco are expected to take on the largest shares of the county's total. growth, totaling 55 percent, or 51,500 new households. Forty=three percent of this growth will be accommodated by these cities' PDAs, ranging from city centers to transit-town centers. In Redwood City, new Growth Opportunity Areas could accommodate an additional 2,560 households. In Santa Clara County, the PDAs along the Caltrain, El Camino Real, and VTA corridors are expected to add about 110,500 new households by 2035, while new Growth Opportunity Areas in the county could accommodate an additional 65,000 households. This combined growth would account for around 69 percent of the county's total growth, greatly improving residents' transit access to major Silicon Valley and Peninsula employment centers. San Jose, a major node along this corridor, is e.Ypected to take on the largest share of any city (15 percent) of the region's total growth. In the inner East Bay, BART connects the communities of Richmond, E1 Cerrito, Berkeley, . Oakland, San Leandro, Hayward, Union City, and Fremont. in close proximity to this transit spine are two mixed-use corridors, San Pablo Avenue and Telegraph Avenue-International Boulevard-Mission .Boulevard, which further link these inner East Bay communities as far north in Contra Costa as Hercules and Rodeo. AC Transit, Amtrak Capitol Corridor, and the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) currently provide transit service to these communities, and Bus Rapid Trar7sit is expected to be developed in the future along the San Pablo Avenue and Telegraph Avenue-International Boulevard-Mission Boulevard corridors. The PDAs along the San Pablo Avenue corridor in Contra Costa County are expected to have nearly 45,000 new households, approximately one-third of the household growth projected for Contra Costa County. The Richmond and El Cen-ito PDAs, with a total of 22,000 new units collectively, will be the. largest nodes of. growth along this corridor.. With forecasted growth of over 25,500 households, Richmond is expected to add the most households in Contra Costa County between 2010 and 2035. It will be the second-largest city in the county, after Concord. In Alameda County, Oakland, the East Bay's largest employment and transit hub, will take on 30 percent of the county's total growth-the largest share o'f any jurisdiction. The approximately 65,500 new households in Oakland will be distributed primarily among the city's seven Priority :Development Areas. Oakland's Downtown & JackLondon Square PDA; a Regional Center; will take on approximately 17,000 new households, while the nearby West Oakland PDA will grow by about 8,200 households. Berkeley and Emeryville, two major employment centers, will co[lectively take on over 10 percent of the county's household growth. These cities' PDAs, which account for a majority of their growth, are already well-established, higher-density mixed-use neighborhoods. In particular, the Downtown Berkeley PDA will grow by almost 1,900 households, while the Emeryville Mixed-Use Core PDA will have approximately 7,300 new households. Alameda County's iru~er East Bay corridor, from San Leandro to Fremont, is expected to add - over 75,000 new households by 2035. After Oakland; Fremont will take on the largest share (13 percent) of the county's growth. Its three PDAs plus its two new Growth Opportunity Areas will Inifral Vision Scenario Page 31 account for nearly 8,500 new households. The four cities of Hayward, Newark, San Leandro, ' and Union City will have nearly 147,OOO.households by 2035, growing by 35,000. The.majority of the growth in these cities is centered on their PDAs, most of which have existing or planned heavy-rail transit service. The 14 Growth Opportunity Areas in Alameda County's inner East Bay communities are expected to take on approximately 9,400 new households by 2035. The Tri-Valley communities are linked to the rest of the region via BART to Dublin, AC.E rail service, and Central Contra Costa Transit Authority Co~inty Connection bus service. The four major cities in the Tri-Valley-Pleasanton; :Livermore, San Ramon, and Dublin-are all major East Bay job centers. These communities are expected to grow by nearly 54,000 households by 2035, each expecting to add between 9,700 and 16,700 new households. The eight PDAs in these communities will accommodate 35 percent ofthese expected new households. Central Contra Costa County--consisting of the major employment centers of Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, and Concord, as well as the smaller communities of.Moraga, Lafayette, Orinda, and Martinez-is expected'to take on 22 percent of Contra Costa County's total household growth. All ofthese communities are connected via the BART to Pittsburg line, with the exception of Martinez, «~hich has Amtrak Capitol Corridor service, and Moraga, with County Connection local bus service. With forecasted grovv~th of over 19,000 households, Concord is expected to take on the second largest share of growth in Contra Costa County between 2010 and 2035. The bulk of this growth will occur in the Los Medanos (Concord Naval Weapons Station) PDA, a new regional center, as well as new Growth Opportunity Area in the existing downtown commercial core. Walnut Creek's West Downtown P.DA will account for about four percent of the county's growth. The city's overall level of growth remains low compared with other major employment centers throughout the region. The PDAs in Pleasant Hill, Martinez, and the "Lamorinda" communities are forecasted to collectively take on four percent of the county's growth. Solano County is linked to the rest of the Bay Area and the Sacramento region by Amtrak Capitol Corridor service. In 2035, Solano County is expected to have about 1.88,000 households-an increase of'about 40,000 fi-om 2010. The cities expected to add the most households are Fairfield (16,400), Vacaville (9,200), and Vallejo (5,800). These cities have identifed several suburban centers, transit town centers, and mixed-use corridors where growth will be accommodated. Nearly all of the gro~irth in Fairfield will be in one of the city's four ' PDAs, which encompass the downtown, the Fairfield-Vacaville Amtrak station, and several of the city's major mixed-use corridors. Growth is also planned in Downto~~m .Benicia; a transit , neighborhood, and in the Downtown and Waterfront area near the Amtrak station in Suisun City, a transit town center. Tor Solano County as a whole, almost 60 percent of household grovv~th over the next 25 years will occur in a.Priority Development Area or Growth Opportunity Area. Although Napa County has no rail, service, the Napa VINE provides connections bettiveen the cities in Napa County and the Vallejo ferry terminal where riders can connect to San Francisco. Napa County is projected to add approximately 4,800 households over the next 25 years, for a total of approximately 56,000 in 2035. Approximately half (54 percent) of this growth will occur Initial Vision Scenario Page 32 in the city of Napa, which accounts for 57 percent of the county's total households in 2035. American Canyon is expected to add more than 1,600 households between 2010 and 2035-34 percent of the county's forecasted growth. All of this growth will be in the city's PDA, the High«~ay 29 Mixed-Use Corridor. - Growth Along Future Transit Corridors The planned BART to Silicon Valley extension will connect Santa Clara County residents to the existing 104-mile BART system and the. major regional employment centers along the Peninsula, and in San Francisco, Oakland, and the East Bay. Stations are planned in .Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara, connecting to. the existing BART system at Fremont. The extension of BART into Santa Clara County will enhance connections To Caltrain, VTA light rail and buses, Altamont Commuter Express, and Amtrak Capitol Corridor, with planned connections to Mineta San Jose International Airport and high-speed rail, significantly extending the reach of the regional transit network. , San Jose; the largest node along this corridor and the region's largest city, is expected to grow by 131,000 new households and will have approximately 436,000 households by 2035-nearly half of Santa Clara County's total. The San ,lose downtown area PDAs, where BART will connect at _ Diridon Station, along with the North San Jose PDA will take on 45 percent ofthis growth. The other PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas in San Jose are expected to add over 54,000 new households. These areas, outside of the core of San Jose, are linked to the larger Santa Clara County transit network via VTA. Milpitas and Santa Clara are expected to add approximately 44,000 new households, collectively. Twenty-five percent ofthis growth will occur in the PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas near the planned BART stations in these cities. Additionally, Growth Opportunity_Areas . along bus and light-rail corridors in the city of Santa Clara are expected to take on 16,200 of these households. In Fremont, the Warm Springs station area is expected to grow by almost 800 .households. Much of the growth in the North Bay counties of_Sonoma and:Marin will be in the communities along the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail .Transit (SMART) line and in the town centers of smaller communities. SMART will link the cities along the Highway 101 corridor, from Cloverdale in the north to Larkspur in the south, where riders can catch a ferry to San Francisco. The SMART stations in the bigger cities, such as Santa Rosa, San Rafael, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, and Windsor, are city centers or suburban centers, while the stations in smaller cities, such as Cloverdale and Cotati, are transit town centers. In Sonoma County, nearly half of projected growth will occur in Santa Rosa-by far the ~ county's largest city with more than 83,000 households in 2035. Of the growth in Santa Rosa, 55 percent will occur near the city's two fuhire SMART stations (in the Downtown/Railroad Square PDA and near the northern Santa Rosa station). Windsor and Rohnert Park are both expected to add almost 5,000 households over the next 25 years, while Petaluma will grow by about 2,900 households. Much of the rest of the projected household grotivth in Sonoma County will take place in rural and suburban areas in unincorporated Sonoma County. Initial Vision Scenario Page 33 3~0~-~~~ Marin County is expected to take on only one percent of the region's growth. Approximately half of Marin County's growth will occur in San Rafael -the county's largest city. San Rafael is expected to add just over 5,000 households, approximately 80 percent of which will be in one of the city's two Priority Development Areas. Unincorporated Marin County is expected to add about 2,700 households, much of whid~ will be in the San Quentin Growth Opportunity Area and the Urbanized 101 Corridor PDA. Nearly 30 percent of Contra Costa County's household growth is expected to occur in east Contra Costa County. Much of this grovti~th will be spurred by the development of eBART, the extension of the BART to Pittsburg line into eastern Contra Costa. The eBART line will have station stops in Pittsburg and Antioch, providing greater access to the larger Bay Area transit network for eastern county residents. Of the 41,800 new households forecast in this part of the county, one-third are expected to develop at the three station areas along the corridor - Pittsburg- Baypoint, Pittsburg-Railroad Avenue, and Antioch-Hillcrest. Citywide, Antioch and Pittsburg each will take on about lU percent of the county's growth, accommodating a total of 29,000 new households, primarily within their PDAs. Oakley is expected to have 17,00 households by 2035, growth of approximately 6,600 new households. 2.3 Employment Distribution by 2035 . Employment distribution arrtong jurisdictions and the nine counties remains comparable to previous regional forecasts. Only the base numbers and growth rate for the region have changed to reflect recent changes in the economy. In the Initial Vision Scenario, the regional economy is expected to grow at a higher rate than the nation, building upon the region's concentration in high-growth industries. Growth is expected to continue in professional services, education and healthcare. The hospitality and entertainment sectors will also grow at a fast pace. Manufacturing and wholesale will grow at a slow pace and continue to relocate jobs outside of the region. However, light industries and services that support core industries will solidify and expand. New industries such as green technology will develop and expand jobs across research and manufacturing at selected locations. In terms of the distribution of job growth in the Initial Vision Scenario, the largest cities outpace the region; as existing employment centers and industry clusters continue to intensify development and add jobs. Employment in the 10 largest cities accounts for more than half of the growth in the region between 2010 and 2035. Slightly more than half of the region's job growth is expected in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. San Francisco, San Mateo, and Contra Costa Counties are also all expected to add more than 100,000 jobs each. Santa Clara, Sonoma, and Solano are expected to grow faster than other counties by 44, 41, and 40 percent; :respectively. The city of San Jose will absorb a higher share of jobs in the Silicon Valley. Walnut Creek and Concord. continue to add office jobs. Pleasanton, .Dublin, and San Ramon continue to attract a range of businesses. Santa Rosa strengthens its role as a major employment center in the North .Bay. Low-density office parks add more jobs and.in some cases housing, while providing transit access. Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 34 Table 2.3: Initial Vision Scenario Total Jobs and Job Growth by Coatnry County - 2010 ~ _ 2'035 _ Joh Percent Jobs' __Johs_ Gro+,vth~Ghance Alameda 675,600 925,400 249,900 37.0% - Contra Costa 345,900 479,400 133,400 38.6% Marin 129,700 151,100 21,400 16.5% Na a 70,100 88,800 18,700 26.7% San Francisco 544,800 713,700 168,900 31.0% San Mateo 330,100 452,200 122,100 37.0% Santa Clara 858,400 1,238,400.. 380,000 44.3% Solano 126,300 176,700 50,400 39.9% Sonoma f 90,400. 267,600 77,200 40.6% a , Regional Total 3.2'1.300 4,4;9„3,300 1.222;OQ0< It is important to note that given the Bay Area's attractiveness for high-value employment and the region's very high housing costs over the last three to four decades, regional planning and related policies and investments have to date largely focused on housing as it relates to transit- oriented development. The current severe recession; global competition; job losses in key sectors of the regional economy, including technology and manufacturing, and deep fiscal challenges at the state and local levels arguably require a more comprehensive regional planning approach to advance a more competit.ive• regional economy. Toward this end, the distributiori of jobs will be further analyzed for the Detailed Scenarios. This analysis will assess whether additional investments in Priority Development Areas and new Growth Opportunity Areas will support additional job growth reflected in local plans, as well as policies such as how employer transportation demand management might shift commute patterns for jobs with quality transit access. Initial Vision Scenario Page 35 . _ - ~ - 3fo~--c~ fable 2.4: Initial Vision Scenario - Hozrsehold and Job Totals and Growth by Jisrisdiction - - Households ~ Johs _ PerEant ~ ~ Pcrecnt Alameda County 2010 X035 Grow,fh Chan e <01D ~ 2035 Growth -Chan Alameda 31,774 39,873 8,099 25.5% 25,347 37,416 12,069 47.6% Alban 7,150 9,317 2,167 30.3% 4,476 4,974 498 11.1% Berkele 46,146 61,876 15,730 34.1% 69,782 78,575 8,794 12.6% Dublin 15,572 32,216 16,644 106.9% 18,058 33,400 15,342 85.0% Eme ville 5,770 13,260 7,490 129.8% 18,198 25,479 7,281 40.0% Fremont 71,004 98,564 27,560 38.8% 86,839 128,484 41,645 48.0% Hayward 46,300 61,283 14,982 32.4% 66;135 84,730 18,595 28.1% Livermore 28,662 40,801 12,138 42.3% 28,485 46,930 18,445 64.8% Newark 13,530 19,331 5,802 42.9% 19,049 21,799 2,750 14.4% Oakland 160,567 226,019 65,453 40.8% 187,328 254,846 67,518 36,0% Piedmont 3,810 3,820 10 0.3% 2,091 2,171 80 3.8% Pleasanton 24,034. 33,819 9.785 40.7% 52,775 70,158 17,382 32.9% San Leandro 31,647 40,447 8,800 27.8% 38,532 51,606 13,074 33.9% Union Cit .20,420 25,900 5,480 26.8% 17,919 33,560 15,642 87.3% Alameda County Unincorporated 51,265 63,872 12,606 24.6% 40,576 51,320 10.744 26.5% - Coun •nde Total 557,651 ` 770 397 1 ^12;'q,6 33.2,~~ 6 591 925,445 249,859 X7.0°i H~uS~ holds Jobs _ t Percent Pi~rcent i Currtra costa Co~,~itV 010 0,,5, Grov~il~ Chan e. 2010 ~0~5 , 2 ~ _ ~ w~.vth ; i~lian Antioch 32,668 46;365 13,697 41.9% 18,529. 37,530 19,001 102.5% Brentwood 1$,250 24,284 6,034 33.1% 6,766 7,731 965 14.3% Cla ton 3,966 4,090 124 3.1% 874 1,158 284 32.5% Concord 46,296 65,624 19,328 41.7% 58,731 88,097 29,366 50.0% Danville - 16,574 17,920 1,346 8.1% 12,837 13,610 772 6.0% EI Cerrito 10,422 20,905 10,483 100.6% 5,154 7,917 2,763 53.6% Hercules 8,361 17,431 9,070 108.5% 2,747 5,344 2,597 94.5% Lafa ette 9,589 11,068 1;479 15.4% 10;087 10,898 810 8.0% Martinez 14,769 16,156 1,387 9.4% 16,919 17,845 926 5.5°!0 Mora a 5,811 6,995 1,184 20.4% 4,603 5,525 922 20.0% Oakle 10,835 17,508 6,673 61.6% 2,720 7,378 4,658 ,171.3% Orinda 6,868 8,788 1,920 28.0% 5,689 6,352 663 11.6% Pinole 7,336 12,623 5,287 72.1% 5,280 6,410 1,130 21.4% Pittsbur 20,849 36,261 15,412 73.9% 12,432 24,657 12,224 98.3% Pleasant Hill 15,247 17,861 2,614 17.1% 13,815 19,148 5,333 38.6% Richmond 37,897 63,439 25,542 67.4% 37,077 57,222 20,145 54.3% San Pablo 9,975 13,027 3,052 30.6% 5,403 8,025 2,622 48.5% San Ramon 22,061 36,682 14,621 66.3% 36,286 48,905 12,619 34.8% Walnut Creek 33,890 40,244 6,354 18.7% 49,309 56,967 7,659 15.5% Contra Costa County Unincorporated 61,016 69,382 8.366 13.7% 40,672 48,654 7,982 19.6% - . noun.., ide T,p,tal ^92;680 5.1.6.653 153,373 39c2% 345,931 42,9,373 1334A2., ,38.6%; Initial Vision Scenario Page 36 J^ off, , _ .viz' ~ ' Households Jobs Percent ~ Percent Maria County 2010 2D35 Grov~tth Chin, c 2010 20 5 Growth 'Chan e Belvedere 949 969 20 2.1% 776 838 62 8.0% Corte Madera 3,948 4,721 773 19.6% 6,482 9,202 2,720 42.0% Fairfax 3,301 3,361 60 1.8% 1,642 1,923 281 17.1% Larks ur 8,036 8,377 341 4.2% 6,708 7,158 451 6.7% Mill Valle 6;267 6;631 364 5.8% 8,181 9,900 1,719 21.0°l0 Novato 20,375 21,153 778 3.8% 25,385 30,753 5,368 21.1% Ross 780 790 10 1.3% 827 924 97 11.7% San Anseimo 5,310 5;370 60 1.1% 4,754 5,170 416 8.8% San Rafael ~ 23,164 28,209 5,045 21.8% 43,649 50,324 _ 6,676 15.3% Sausalito 4,310 4,400 90 2.1% 6,543 7,740 1,198 18.3% Tiburon 3,844 4;242 398 10.4% 3,494 3,997 503 14.4% Maria County Unincor orated 26,162 28,900 2,738 10.5% 21,238 23.166 1,927 9.1% Cnun_;lfidrTutal 106^~14~ i 1i~ 724 10,670 10.0i~ t2y_6~9 151;097 21.418` 165:0 . 1 H~.useh~~ds - J~~bs - - - Percent ~ PercF rt i tda~a !~~irnt, j 40;0 2035 Growth Gtiaiz .Y 2p1p~1 '?035 Growth.' Chan e' American Can on 5,761 7,392 1,632 28.3% 2,204 4,321 2,117 96.0% Calisto a 2,140 2,171 31 1.4% 2,748 3,243 495 18.0% Na a 29,440 32,019 2,579 8.8% 34,272 44,565 10,293 30.0% St. Helena 2,440 2,533 93 3.8% 5,763 6,191 428 7.4% Yountville 1,110 1,230 120 10.8% 2,104 2,624 520 24.7% Napa County Unincorporated 4 10,370 10,716 346 3.3% 23,044 27,894 4,850 21.0% Cuunt~ w,idc Tot~if i 51:260 56.061 3,41 9.4%~ . 70.136 88:838 1u 703 26.7%; Hut~sehol~is-- j,~bs _ _ ~ ~ Percent Pcrcciit San PrlnCljil~l Cutinty ~ X090 2035 Y~mvath Glianyi~ 2016 1035 Growth Chango Sai~ } ~anciscc ~ ~~80 -i'~- ,'~4 90,114 l% 544,755 713,651 ~ _ r.~urat~~wideT©T_3I 336.b80 436,; 94 90;1.14 :2a.0°1° 544,755 713;651 ~~-1b8.S31 31 lnitial Vision Scenario Page 37 Households ~ Jobs Percent ~ Per~cnt .San Mateo County 2010 2035 Growth Chan e ~ 2010 2035 Growth ~ Chan c_. Atherton 2,490 2,580 90 3.6% 2;485 2,632 147 5.9% .Belmont 10,740 12,759 2,01.9 18.8% 6,635 11,738 5,102 76.9% Brisbane ~ 1,730 5,324 3,594 207.7% 7,991 17,402 9,411 117.8% Burlin ame 13,247 19,431 6,184 46.7% 21,905 26,728 4,823 22.0% Colma 460 1,372 912 198.3% 3,111 4,310 1,199 38.5% Dal Cit 31,261 43,095 11,834 37.9% 16,772 27,084 10,312 61.5% East Palo Alto 7,780 12,310 4,530 582% 2,105 6,484- 4,379 208.1% FosterCit 12,210. 13,767 1,557 12.8% 13,923 18,560 4,637 33.3% Half Moon Ba 4,440 4,730 290 6.5% 4,355 5,539 1,184 27.2% Hillsborou h 3,837 4,589 752 19.6% 1,624 2,277 653 40.2% Menlo Park 12,432 17,563 5,130 41.3% 25,145 29,501 4,356 17.3% Millbrae 8,308 12,910 4,602 55.4°!° 6,731 10,238 3,507 52.1% Pacifica 14,320 14,600 280 2.0% 6,051 7,467 1,415 23.4% Portola Valle 1,730 1,780 50 2.9% 1,686 1,888 202 12.0% Redwood Cit 29,620 41,032 11,412 38.5% 48,682 63,717 15,035 30.9% San Bruno 15,262 21,699 6,437 42.2% 13,537 17,938 4,401 32.5% San Carlos 11,909 15,707 3,798 31.9% 15,024 21,976 6,952 46.3% San Mateo 38,643 56,678 18,035 46.7% 43,337 58,896 15,559 35.9°!0 South San Francisco 20,288 30,522 10,234 50.4% 41,328 54,485 13,157 31.8% Woodside 2,029 2,059 30 1.5% 2,381 2;498 117 4.9% San Mateo County - Unincorporated 21,780 23,830 2,050 9.4% 45,326 60,869 15,542 34.3% Goun wideTc~tal 264.516 358,337 93.821 35.5°l0 3311.135 ~ 45_226 122091 ~ 3~ 0'.!, - ~ Households _ John j Percent ~ ~ercent S,aii~ta Clara County _ 2010 20_x5 Gr gwth Chan e~ ~20;1i0 203b _U~pw,tn,,;Chan c Cam bell 16,892 21,002 4,110 24.3% 22,099 26,897 4,798 21.7% Cu ertino 19,830 21-,588 1,758 8.9% 30,513 35,283 4,770 15.6% Gilro 14,330 22,118 7,788 54.3% .16,652 22,666 6,014 36.1% Los Altos . 10,670 11',968 1,298 12.2% 10,250 11,511 1,261 12.3% Los Altos Hills 3,053 3,088 35 1:1% 1,845 1,937 ~ 93 5.0% Los Gatos 12,430 .13,151 721 5.8% 18,275 20,700 2,425 13.3% Mil itas 19,030 38,758 19,728 103.7% 46,784 55,624 8,840 18.9% Monte Sereno 1,229 1,269 40 3.3% 400 532 132 33.1% Mor an Hill 12,399 20;040 7,641 61.6% 12,698 20,806 8,109 63.9% Mountain View 32,114 50,348 18,234 ~ 56.8% 50,074 64,507 14,434 28.8% Palo Alto 26,705 .38,692 11,987 44.9% 73,303 78,163 4,860 6.6% San Jose 305,087 435,585 130,498 42.8% 342,799 593,219 250,420 73.1% Santa Clara 43,403 67,672 24,269 55.9% 103,186 138,386 35,200 34:1% Sarato a 11,000 11,118 118 1.1% ,6,826 7,279 453 6.6% Sunn vale • 54,170 73,425 19,255 35.5% 72,392 96,408 24,016 33.2% Santa Clara County Unincorporated 31,604 37,991 6,386 20.2% 50,304 64,481 14,177 28.2% - - - - - C~,uc~_ ,J~irie T©lal 613;947, 8&7,8fi3 '253,$¢G 41:x'', u""50,3,99 1 238 400 :,50.001 44.3'', Initial Vision Scenario Page 38 _ Hcusci~_o1~is _ _Jobs Percent Percent So{anv ~~uizt}, ~ 2010 ~ ~2035 =6row,fti ~ha~~ e 2010 ~ 2035 C,rowth. Chan e Benicia 11,329 13,527 2,198 19.4% 14,043 17,485 3,442 24.5% Dixon 5,617 8,222 2,605 46.4% 4,330 7,239 2,909 67.2% Fairfield 36,061 52,476 16,415 45.5% 42,864 60,579 17,716 41.3% Rio Vista 3,540 4,737 1,197 33.8% 1,191 2,327 1,136 95.3% Suisun Cit 9,.132 10,548 1,415 15.5% 3,210 4,637 1,428 44.5% Vacaville 32,620 41,775 9,155 28.1% 23,422 35,030 11,608 49.6% Valle~o 42,043 ,47,814 5,771 13.7% 28,415 38,258 9,843 34.6°1° Solano County lJninco orated 7,817 8,677 860 11.0% 8,853 11,156 2,302 26.0% 'County +~1r Total 148:160.:. 1b7,776 ~9.6'lb 2b.7 126 ~?S 176,711- 50.38"i 09.9', _ Hou .ch~~lds _ - lobs ~ f Percent ~ Pen ent S~uiom.3 County C10 20 ,o GnrNtl~i ~han~ e 2Q10 24.=~ Gr„tik~ih i Chang. ~ ~ Cloverdale 3,211 4,639 1,428 44.5% 1,430 1,961 531 37.1% Cotati 2,832 3,387 555 19.6% 2,043 2,192 149 7.3% Healdsbur 4,390 5,284 894 20.4% 5,111 6,193 1,082 21.2% Petaluma 21,775 24,713 2,938 13.5% 26,968 34:870 7,902 29.3% Rohnert Park 15,718 20,395 4,677 29.8% 13,566 21,506 7,940 •58.5% Santa Rosa 62,886 83,010 20,124 32.0% 72,324 11.7,005 44,680 61.8% Sebasto of 3,325 3,595 270 8.1% 4,753 5,333 581 12.2% Sonoma 4,476. 5,036 560 12.5% 7,005 7,924 919 13.1% Windsor 8,884 13,809 4,925 55.4°l0 5,154 7,782 2,628 51.0% Sonoma County Unincorporated 60,933 67,505 6,572 10.8% 52,015 62,822 10,807 20.$% - - - - Coun wide Total ' 188:430 231,373 42,943 22.8' 190,369 267 588.E j 7'.219 a0.6°~0 2.4 Evaluation of Initial Vision Scenario The lnitial Vision Scenario has been evaluated against a set of performance targets and has also undergone a preliminary equity analysis. The performance targets were adopted by MTC and ABAG for the Sustainable Communities Strategy and the Regional Transportation Plan in January 2011. '['he equity indicators were discussed with the Regional Equity Working Group in Febntary 2011. 2.4.1 Performance Targets The performance targets reflect a comprehensive set of goals for regional transportation and land use planning, including climate protection, adequate housing, healthy and safe communities, open-space and agricultural preservation, equitable access, economic vitality, and transportation system effectiveness. Table 2.5 provides the results of the performance target analysis for the _ Initial Vision Scenario. ' Initial Vision Scenario " Page 39 Two of the performance targets (targets 1 and 2 below) are required by state legislation, while a third target is based on a federal standard (target 3 .below): 1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Target: The California Air Resources Board (GARB) has set regional targets for each Metropolitan Planning Organization to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks for years 2020 and 2035. . 2. Housing Target: SB 375 effectively requires each region to set target levels for 25 years of housing growth based on accommodating all population growth by income level. 3. Fine Particulate Matter (PM,.S :the US `Environmental Protection Agency has designated • the Bay Area as not meeting air quality standards for particulate matter less than micrometers PM2,5 and MTC must demonstrate the SCS/RTP conforms to the new standard. - This assessment provides a first overview of how household growth focused on selected place types and transit networks could. meet regional goals. This Initial Vision Scenario outlines major progress toward the comprehensive sustainability and equity goals of the region, but remains short in some areas. The Initial Vision Scenario meets the housing goal as it is embedded as an assumption for this scenario. About 95 percent of the growth in housing units is distributed within the urban footprint; it is assumed that the remaining 5 percent outside the urban footprint will be very-low-density housing that is allowable under existing development rules of the respective jurisdictions. When compared to previous forecasts, this scenario introduces major improvements on climate protection, with an expected reduction of COQ emissions from cars and light trucks by 12 percent. However, it remains short of the official targets established by the California Air Resources Board by three percent. The performance of the. Initial Vision Scenario with respect to the targets related to healthy and safe communities, equitable access, and transportation system effectiveness is mixed, indicating some improvements over previous trends and previous forecasts, but also the need for. additional efforts and strategies. Relative to air quality, this scenario will reduce premature deaths by 25 percent, exceeding the target of 10 percent. This is primarily due to California Air Resources Board regulations that reduce emissions from diesel trucks. Overall, coarse particulate matter (PM~~) emissions. will be reduced by 10 percent, less than half of the target. Fatalities and severe injuries from collisions increase, rather than go down. This is connected to the fact that more people are walking and biking. The amount of time people spend walking and biking for transportation increases from 9 minutes per day to 11 minutes, but falls short of the target of 15 minutes per day. The Initial Vision Scenario meets the targeted reduction of housing and transportation costs for lo~v-income residents; however, this reflects the assumption embedded in the scenario that the region's total demand for housing at all income levels is met. Similarly, the unconstrained financing assumption of the scenario means that the road repair and transit asset targets are also met. ;With the ninth target, average per-trip transit distance and time increases slightly under the Initial Vision Scenario, while the target proposes a reduction by 10 percent. However, this is the result of an increase. in the overall length of transit trips, as longer transit trips"become more convenient and more travelers switch. from auto to transit for these trips. Initial Vision Scenario Page 40 Table 2. S: Performance Target Results for the Initial Vision Scenario GOAL/OUTCOME # TARGET RESULT CLIMATE 1 Reduce per-capita C01 emissions from cars and light-duty iz% reduction PROTECTION trucks by z5% ADEQUATE House soo% of the region's projected z5-year growth by loo% housing need z income level (very-low, low, moderate, above-moderate) HOUSING without displacing current low-income residents met • Premature Reduce premature deaths from exposure to particulate deaths reduced emissions: by z4%* • Reduce premature deaths from exposure to fine PMio emissions 3 particulates (PMz.S) by zo% reduced by lo% • Reduce coarse particulate emissions (PMio) by 30% Highly impacted • Achieve reater reductions in hi hl Im acted areas area results not HEALTHY$eSAFE g g y p available at this - COMMUNITIES time Reduce by 5o%the number of injuries and fatalities from all . 4 collisions (including bike and pedestrian) zs°/a increase Increase the average daily time walking or biking per person 5 fortransportation by 60% (tor an average of i5 minutes per is minutes per day person per day) OPEN SPACE AND Direct all non-agricultural development within the urban g~% of households AGRICULTURAL 6 footprint (existing urban development and urban growth within urban PRESERVATION boundaries) footprint " EQUITABLE Decrease by io%the share of.low-income and lower- 3%decrease in share ACCESS ~ middle-income residents' household income consumed by of income spent on transportation and housing housing ECONOMIC 8 Increase gross regional product (GRP) by 90% - an average Not available atthis VITALITY annual growth rate of approximately z% (in current dollars) time Decrease per-trip travel time by lo% Non-auto trip- TRANSPORTATION • Decrease average per-trip travel time by lo% for non- time increase by SYSTEM g auto modes 7% (z minute) EFFECTIVENESS • Decrease automobile vehicle miles traveled (VMI~ per • VMT per capita capita by io% reduced by 10% *Preliminary results Initial Vision Scenario Page 41 y ~o~" 2.4.2 Equity Assessment The equity analysis reveals whether the benefits and burdens forecast by the performance targets are equally distributed between low- and non-low-income households. Where possible, these outcomes are also compared with current conditions. The intent of this preliminary analysis is to identify potential negative regional eq~iity results at the beginning of the planning process. Understanding where current disparities exist.for low-income households and how the Sustainable Communities Strategy might address them will be the subject of fuhtre analyses. Additional measures may include wages, existing school performance, and jobs/housing match. Table 2.6: Resz~lts of Ega~ity Analysis of Performance Targets for the Initial Vision Scenario GOAL/OUTCOME TARGET CURRENT CONDITIONS 2o35RE5ULT CLIMATE PROTECTION D2Crease automobile Low-income households: Low-income vehicle miles traveled per 9 miles a day households: i4% capita by io%* reduction Non-low-income ~ Non-low-income households: i8 miles a households: ii°.o day reduction ADEQUATE HOUSING House soo%of the region's Not available Adequate housing for projected zs-yeargrowth by all projected residents, income level (very-low, low, based on scenario moderate, above-moderate) assumptions. without displacing current low-income residents HEALTHY AND SAfE COMMUNITIES Increase the average daily Low-income ' time walking orbiking per Low-income households: households: z3 person for transportation by Zi minutes a day minutes a day; 6o%(foran average of ss minutes per person per day) Non-low-income Non low-income households: g minutes a households: io day minutes a day ECONOMIC VITALITY Average travel time per Low-income households: Low-income work or school trip* ig minutes households: increase Non-low-income Non-low-income households: zo minutes households: z% ~ increase Average dailytravel casts* Low-income households: Low-income ~z.79 pertypicalday households: l7% increase Non-low-income Non-low-income households: $r+.S9 per households: zi% Initial Vision Scenario Pale 42 typical day increase TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. Decrease average per-trip Low-income households: Low-income EFFECTIVENESS travel timebyio%fornon- zr,minutes households: za/o auto modes increase Non-low-income Non-low-income households: z5 minutes households: 8~/a increase * These goals required a substitute target: Data or methods of analysis are not available for all targets. Initial Vision Scenario Paje 43 ~ to ~ x'19 3. -COUNTY VISION SCENARIOS The Initial Vision Scenario distributes growth in each Bay Area county based on the same overarching principle of concentrating development in transit-served areas to create more sustainable communities. However, since each county has its own unique characteristics, each county vision scenario was carefully shaped to reflect differences in history, geography, development patterns, and local planning efforts. The following narratives convey a vision of how growth over the next quarter century might transform each county's Priority-Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas. They also describe how residents might benefit from the increased housing and transportation choices, better access to jobs and services, and protection of natural resources that would result from a more focused growth pattern. Table 3..1: Initial Visivn Scenariv -Total Households and Household Growth by County and Priority Devel~ment Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas _ _ 2b10 2035 Household Percent Corint ~ Hr~usehoicis Hcius~h~lds Growth Gii:~n e Alameda 557,700 770,400 212,700 38% PDAs and Growth O ortunit Areas 161;100 293,700 132,600 82% Contra Costa 392,700 546,700 154,000 39% PDAs and Growth O ortunit Areas 35,100 135,700 100,600 287% Marin 106,400 117,100 10,700 10% PDAs and Growth O ortunit Areas 4,700 10,900 6,200 134% Napa 51,300 56,100 4,800 9% PDAs and Growth O portunit Areas 300 1,900 1,600 618% San Francisco 346,700 436,800 90,100 26% PDAs and Growth O ortunit Areas 346,700 436,800 90,100. 26% San Mateo 264,500 358,300 93,800 36% PDAs and Growth Opportunit Areas 87,400. 162,700 75,300 86°l0 Santa Clara .613,900 867,800 253,900 41% PDAs and Growth O ortunit Areas 78,300 .253,800 175,600 224% Solano 148,200 1.87,800 39,600 27% PDAs and Growth O artunit Areas 4,100 26,600 22,500 543% Sonoma 188,400 231,400 42,900 23% PDAs and Growth O portunit Areas 25,200 55,500 30,300 121% Regiohwide ~ 2,669,800 3,572,300 902,600 34% PDAs and Growth Opportunit Areas 742,800 1,377,700 634,800 85% Initial Vision Scenario Page 44 Alameda County Nestled between the hills of the Diablo Range to the east and. the San Francisco Bay to the west, . Alameda County attracts residents and businesses because of its central location, diverse economy, unique communities, and natural beauty. Alameda County has long been a hub of economic activity. Starting in the late 1880x, the railroads and seaport in Oakland drew manufacturing and industry that spread to other waterfront cities, including Berkeley, Alameda, Emeryville, San Leandro, and Hayward. More jobs brought more residents, and new neighborhoods soon developed along major transportation routes, including rail and streetcar lines. The cities grew as construction of bridges, highways, and transit services enabled efficient access to San Francisco and the emerging job centers in Silicon Valley and the Peninsula. As -cars became prevalent and roadways expanded, growth reached outward. The communities of Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, and Fremont developed rapidly during the 1960s and 1970x. During the fate 20th century, Alameda County residents became concerned about the rate at which growth was consuming open space. The hillsides; ridgelines, ranchlands; and waterfront that helped define the county's sense of place were threatened. A desire to protect these natural resources prompted a shift toward more compact development. County voters approved Measure D in 2000 establishing acounty-wide urban growth boundary and preventing the subdivision o:f ranchland. Salt ponds along the bay were transformed into a national wildlife refuge. The county also identified 19 Priority Conservation Areas, which included key wildlife habitats, scenic resources, trails acid recreational areas. Protecting these spaces will ensure that visitors can continue to appreciate the dramatic views of the hills and bay and enjoy access to trails:that provide an important connection to the natural environment. The Initial Vision Scenario foresees Alameda County by 2035 as a network of compact downtowns, mixed-use neighborhoods, and employment centers connected by high-quality transit service, including rail lines and buses. Directing new homes and jobs into neighborhoods along major transportation corridors will help it remain one of the drivers of the Bay Area economy. Downtown Oakland will be a vibrant regional center and the primary job center in the East Bay. It will have residential buildings, high-rise offces, and regional- and local-serving retail clustered around the 12th Street and 19th Street BART stations. The transit network will connect downtown to other job-rich neighborhoods, including West Oakland, FruitvalelDimond and the MacArthur 'Transit Village. Other transit-served locations. will also be county job centers, including the Emerydille, Fremont, and Berkeley city centers, as well as the Hacienda Business Park in Pleasanton: Transit improvements, such as the extension of.BART to Silicon Valley, will. give county residents even greater access to job opporhinities, and help attract new businesses. The Port of Oakland will remain one of the West Coast's busiest. Other industrial hubs that were at the heart of Alameda County's early growth will have been modernized. Areas such as West Berkeley, Emeryville, West Oakland, and Warm Springs in Fremont already are home to new light industries and services, especially in the clean-tech sector, which includes renewable energy, green building, and other sustainable industries. This trend is expected to continue. Other areas that no longer support industrial functions, such as Alameda Point, the Dumbarton in Initial Vision Scenario Page 45 ` Newark, and the Cannery neighborhood in Hayward, will have transitioned to transit town centers and transit neighborhoods that include a mix of residential,. retail, and employment uses. By 203, transit corridors, such as San Pablo Avenue in the north, .Fremont Boulevard in the south, and the Telegraph Avenue-International Boulevard-Mission Boulevard corridor that extends from Berkeley to Union City, will provide essential connections.among the city centers, transit town centers, urban neighborhoods, and transit neighborhoods that have experienced significant growth over the past several decades. Travel along these. corridors will be fast and efficient.. Bus Rapid Transit and local buses will offer links to BART, Altamont Commuter Express (ACE), and Amtrak Capitol Corridor train stations; providing flexible options for people to get around. The Oh(one Greenway, East Bay Greenway, Iron Horse Trail, and other trails will provide safe and enjoyable routes for bicyclists and pedestrians. Three- to six-story residential buildings along these mixed-use corridors will provide affordable housing choices for people of all ages and incomes, with stores, services, offices, parks, and public facilities clustered at key intersections and,transit stops. These nodes will serve the daily. needs ofpeople living in nearby apartments, condominiums, and townhomes, as well as residents of surrounding lower-density neighborhoods. The inviting streetscapes and pedestrian scale.will make it easy and safe for transit users, pedestrians, and bicyclists to shop locally or travel to other destinations along the corridor. In the Tri-Valley, access to regional transit, such as B.A.RT and ACE, will have spurred higher- . densih~ development near the rail stations. Places that were once dominated by automobiles will have become pedestrian-oriented districts with a variety of housing choices and easy access to stores and services..Do.rvntown Livermore residents will be able to walk to catch a shoe; see a movie, or dine out. In Pleasanton, Hacienda Business Park will redevelop as a mixed-use center. In nearby Dublin the downtown, Transit Center, and Town Center will have become focal points for community life. _ initial Vision Scenario Page 46 L4 a~sd ouzuaos u~ist~ ~ei~iul ~ i~- - , _ 4 j _ ~ ; r`, . ~ u ~ _ 'i t•;~~, i ~ ~ yE 'i ~ i ~ s~ ~ - - ~ is ..a ~ Y ~ - ~ v ~ 1, rl - i t ~ T C 1 V Y :,,3 - i F i kQ .J , ~ r ~ ~ a( ~ _ ~i ? r t ~ ~ [ i ~ ' Y ~ x ~ e; i. : I - - - ~ Pa ~ ~i% .l• ~ ~ ~ . . y_ J lir -i {a - .L , _ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ! - , . ~ ~ ~ 4 ?~f ? _ r, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .lam ~ _ ~ _ _ _ N A ~ Q E r i - a ~ s~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ,_I ~7 t' - a a ~ 4 tp G p Table 3.2: Alameda County Initial Vision Scenario Household Grotivth 2010-203.5 for Priority • Development Areas and Growth Gpportunity Areas by ,Ii~risdiction l;~lameda. ~tu~nt~y Households Jurisdiction or Area Name Place Type 2010 2035 Growth % Change Alameda ~ ~ 31,774 39,873 8,099 25.5% Naval Air Station (PDA) Transit Town Center 761 4,851 4,090 537% Northern Waterfront (GOAD Transit Neighborhood 322 1,303 981 305% Albany ~ 7,150 9,317 Z, 167 30.3% San Pablo Avenue & Solano Ntixed-Use Corridor 974 1, 732 1,258 265 % Avenue (GOA) Berkeley 46,146 61,876 15,730 34.1% Adeline Street (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 465 1,342 877 189% Downtown (PDA) City Center 1,894 6,772 4,878 258% San Pablo Avenue (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 798 4,081 3,283 411% South Shattuck (PDA} Mixed-Use Corridor 21 372 351 1644°0 Telegraph Avenue (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 444 1,816 1,372 309% University Avenue (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 987 3,120 2,132. 216% Dublin 15,572 32,216 16,644 106.9% Downtown Specific Plan Area Suburban Center 413 2,156 1,743 422% (PDA) Town Center (PDA) Suburban Center - 4,052 6;672. 2,620 65% Transit Center (PDA) Suburban Center 543 2,541 1,997 368% Emeryville 5,770 13,250 7,490 129.8% Mixed-Use Core (PDA) City Center 3,583 10,849 7,266 203% Fremont 71, 004 98,569 27, 560 38.8% Centerville (PDA} Transit Neighborhood 4,611 6,000 1,389 30% City Center (PDA) City Center 6,305 8,569 2,264 36% Irvington District (PDA) Transit Town Center 4,313 6,200 1,887 44°0 Ardenwood Business Park (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 0% Fremont Boulevard & Warm Mixeo=Use Corridor 6, 076 8,119 2, 043 39% Springs Boulevard Corridor (GOA) Fremont Boulevard Decoto Road Mixed-Use Corridor 193 281 138 96% Crossing (GOA) South FremonUWarm Springs Suburban Center 4 759 755 78875% Hayward 46,300 61,283 14,982 32.4% Downtown City Center 2,031 4,945 2,914 143% South Hayward BART (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 745 1,680 935 - 125% South Hayward BART (PDA) Urban Neighborhood 1,491 3,360 1,869 125% The Cannery (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 213 961 748 350% Carlos Bee Quarry (GOAD Mixed-Use Corridor 23 575 552 2400% • • Mission Corridor (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 474 1, 446 972 205% continued on next page Key: PDA -Priority Development Area, GOA -Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 48 ;tea;.' Alameda County (continued) - Hausehotds Jurisdiction or Area Name Place Type 2010 2035 Growth % Change Livermore 28,662. 40,801 12,138 42.3% Downtown (PDA) Suburban Center 695 3,485 2,790 402°I° Vasco Road TOD (PDA) Suburban Center 232 914 682 294% Newark 13,530 19,331 5,802 42.9% ' Dumbarton Transit Oriented Transit Town Center 9. 2,910 2,901 .33232% Development (PDA) Old Town Mixed Use Area (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 283 1,474 1,190 420% • Cedar Boulevard Transit (GOA) Transit Neighborhood 7 358 357 35718% S Civic Center Re-Use Transit (GDAJ Transit Neighborhood 63 212 199 236% Oakland 160, 567 226, 019 65, 453 90.8% Coliseum BART Station Area {PDA) Transit Town Center 2,903 6,913 4,010 138% Downtown & Jack London Square Regional Center 8,054 25,146 17,092 212°1° (PDA) Eastmont Town Center (PDA} Urban Neighborhood 3,877 6,113 2,236 58% Fruitvale & Dimond Areas (PDA) Urban Neighborhood 11,926 19,068 7,142 60% MacArthur Transit Village (PDA) Urban Neighborhood 8,100 12,302 4,202 52% Transit Oriented Development Mixed-Use Corridor 60,360 78,945 18,585 31% Corridors {PDA) West Oakland (PDA) Transit Town Center 8,905 17,147 8,242 93% Piedmont 3,870 3,820 10 0.3% Pleasanton 24,034 33,819 .9,785 40.7% Hacienda (PDA) Suburban Center 1,402 5,264 3,862 276°!° San Leandro 31,647 90,947 8,800 27.8% Bay Fair BART Transit Village Transit Town Center 504 1,552 1,048 208°1° (PDA) ' Downtown Transit Oriented City Center 3,630 6,494 2,864 79% Development (PDA) - East 14th Street (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 1,597 5,329 3,732 234% Union City 10,420 25,900 5,480 26,8% Intermodal Station District (PDA) City Center 601 2,723 2,122 353% Mission Boulevard (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor - 2 752 150 - 7491 °ro Otd Alvarado (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 55 208 153 278% Alameda County Unincorporated 51,265 63,872 12,606 24.6% Castro I/aliey BART (GOA) 7-ransit Neighborhood 7,294 1, 967 673 52 % East 14th Street and Mission Mixed-Use Corridor 5,782. 6,982 1,200 21 °6 BaulevardMixed Ilse Corridor (GOA) Key: PDA -Priority Development Area, GOA =Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario . Page 49 - - Contra Costa County Named "opposite coast" for its location across the bay from San Francisco and Marin County, Contra Costa County has grown to be one of the most populous areas in our region. Home to Mount Diablo, the second-tallest peak in the Bay Area, Contra Costa's natural beauty and strategic location between the San Francisco bay a.nd Central Valley has long attracted residents and businesses. Early industrial activity sprouted up along the county's extensive shoreline on the bay and Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. After World War II agricultural communi#ies in central Contra Costa became rail depots serving surrounding farm lands. Past-war, auto-oriented growth . continued through the end of the 20`" century pushing development eastward. Over one-third of Contra Costa County's most recent population explosion took place in East County. Concern about the effects of uncontrolled growth on mobility, open space, jobs, economic development, and quality of life came to a head in 2003. That's when county leaders, residents, and other stakeholders came together to develop Shaping Our Future, a vision and implementation strategy to guide future growth and development. The resulting Principles of Agreement ~ including growth management, land use and transportation connections, open space protection; infill investment, social equity, and economic development -has provided a f1•amework to guide growth into a more sustainable development pattern. The Initial Vision Scenario projects a continued emphasis on.sustainable development. It envisions focused growth between now and 2035 in existing urban centers, built upon the extensive transit network that includes BART and Amtrak rail service, Bus Rapid Transit, ferry service, and local and sub-regional buses. Though the county will be the third most populous in the region, concentrated growth within this linked network will enhance communities' quality of life, while helping to protect significant open spaces, including "Lamorinda" (.Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda} area ridgelines, coastal wetlands, agricultural areas, and the Los Medanos Hills. Many of these natural resources have been included in the I S Priority Conservation Areas identified in the county. In West County, the San Pablo Avenue Corridor will take on a significant portion of the county's housing growth, reinforcing this area's urban character. As one of the.East Bay's major thoroughfares, connecting city centers, employment centers, transit neighborhoods, and transit town centers in El Cerrito, Richmond, San Pablo; Pinole, and Hercules, this mixed-use corridor is unique in size and scope. The Initial Vision Scenario foresees a linear community space _ offering residentsparks, recreation, walkable retail and entertainment destinations and equitable ` housing choices. Richmond is expected to add the most households and will surpass.Concord as Contra Costa's largest city. High-density residential and commercial nodes at the three BART . stations in EI Cerrito and Richmond, and new Bus Rapid Transit service along San Pablo Avenue will have transformed this historically auto-dominated environment into amulti- . purpose, sustainable; healthy, and livable corridor. The city of Concord .will remain a major employment hub. By 2035, the Concord Naval Weapons S#ation will have been transformed into ahigh-density employment-focused regional Initial Vision Scenario Page 50 ,;v. 530-~~ o ~ center anchored by the North Concord BART station. This center will be connected to lower- density transit neighborhoods through a network of new local transit, walkable streets, and biking corridors. This new community will provide a dynamic place to live, work and play while sustaining the quality of life. New mixed-use development within and surrounding the downtown will enhance the existing community by enriching the urban core. Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill will continue to be engines of economic activit}~, wifh mid-rise commercial and residential development clustered around the BART stations. The nearby Martinez and "Lamorinda" transit town centers and transit neighborhoods will retain their small- town characteristics, with ari increased mix of uses, including the addition of more housing, and a more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly environment. In the Tri-Valley region, San Ramon will remain a suburban center with a high concentration of employment balanced by new housing and retail. By 2035 anew pattern of suburban development will have emerged in East County. The extension of BART to Pittsburg and Antioch will have fostered new growth, primarily within a more compact, transit-oriented configuration around existing downtowns. "l:'hese suburban centers and transit town centers will provide a variety of transportation options that will improve access within East County and to regional centers throughout the Bay Area. New homes, stores, civic institutions, and community gathering places will transform the quality of life. Initial Vision Scenario Page 51 ZS a~aa oueuaas uoistn ~et~rui __o~_ ~ -i - - e ~ r f: , = u s~: : 4 ' ~ , t= s ~ ~ A z d P 8 ~ ~~8 g a .i a u X 0 9 L p) t~.. ~ _ a 4 A i' . - , ~`r t i o t $ ~ _ .v r- ~ L K ~ ~ ` 1 O t~, ~ ~ o P! ~ '~j U 1 i 1_ ~r ~ C Q • f _ 1 o U ~ i Q ~ ~m is ~ t f rat ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ o - ~ O J e: ~ \ ~ , r_ ~ ~ . ` . t _ , ~ A~ ~ ~ t. ~ ' r,` ~ ~ 4 1!`~ ry r yy ~ - N . l / '~R ~ ) L/ - `,"~o ~ ~ ~ a . ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~ q ~ . , ~ ~ ~ w ~r ~ _ - . Table 3.3: Contra Costa County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction Contra Costa County Househo~ds~ - - luri•~dlchnn ~r Frica Nrrne PIS+~_e Ty~c 201 ?03~ Growth Clianq~_ - Antioch 32,668 46,365 13,697 41.9% Hillcrest eBART Station (PDA) Suburban Center 1 4,852 4,851 500080% Rivertown Waterfront (PDA) Transit Town Center. 1,705 4,458 2,754 162°!° Brentwood 18,25D 24,284 .6,034 33.1% Clayton 3,966 4,D90 124 3.1 Concord 46,296 65,624 19,328 41.7% Community Reuse Area (PDA) Regional Center - 46 4,147 4,101 8881% Community Reuse Area (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 99 7,713 7,614 7664% Downtown BART Station Planning Area City Center 1, 980 6, 400 4 420 223% (GOA) North Concord BARTAdacent Employment Center 0 0 0 0°0 Employment Center (GOA) West Downtown Planning Area (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 0 595 595 NA Danville 16,574 17,920 1,346 8.1% E! Cerrito 10,422 20,905 10,483 100.6% San Pablo Avenue Corridor (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 1,020 10,670 9,650 946°ro Hercules 8,361 17,931 9,070 108.5% Central Hercules (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 0 4,561 4,561 NA Waterfront District (PDA) Transit Town Center 174 2,853 2,679 1540% Lafayette 9,589 11,068. 1,479 15.4% Downtown (PDA) Transit Town Center 1,596 2,601 1,005 63% Martinez 14,769 16,156 1,387 9.9% Downtown (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 417 1,679 1,262 303% Moraga 5,811 6,995 1,184 20.4% Moraga Center (PDA) , Transit Town Center 175 803 628 360°o Oakley 10,835 77,508 6,673 61.6% . Downtown (PDA) Transit Town Genter 741 1,892 1,151 155% Employment Area (PDA} Suburban Center 384 1,268 885 231% Potential Planning Area (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 424 1,653 1,228 290% Orinda 6,868 8,788 .1,920 28.0% Downtown (PDA) Transit Town Center 154 1,459 1,305 846% Pino% 7,336 12,623 5,287 72.1 % Appian Way Corridor (PDA) Suburban Center 680. 1,704 1,024 151 Oltl Town (PDA) Transit Town Center 951 4,41.7 3,466 364% Pittsburg 20,849 36,261 15,412 73.9% Downtown (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 1,540 3,492 1,952 127% Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station (PDA) Transit Town Center 0 .2,434 2,434 NA Railroad Avenue eBART Station {PDA) Transit Town Center 4,459 7,612 3,153 71 Pleasant Hi11 15,297 17,861 2,614 17.1 Buskirk Avenue Corridor (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 1,450 2,359 909 63% Diablo Valley College (PDA) _ Transit Neighborhood 488 1,703 1,215 249% continued on next page Initial Vision Scenario Page 53 Contra Costa_County lconfinued,) Flouseholds - - - - lun~,di~.t!on nr Arr~,~i Ni;mt~ Nlacc I'/p~, 2010 X035 C riivith ~ Changr Richmond 37,897 63,439 25,542 T67.4% Central Richmond (PDA) City Center. 485 7,859 7,374 1521% South Richmond (PDA) ~ Transit Neighborhood 3,880 6,860 2,980 77% 23rd Street Mixed Use Corridor 332 7,199 867 261 San Pablo Avenue Corridor (GOA) Mixed Use Corridor 653 2, 057 1, 404 215% San Pablo 9,975 13,027 3,052 30.6% San Ramon 22,061 36,682 14,621 66,3% City Center (PDA) Suburban Center 388 4,042 3,654 942% North Camino Ramon (PDA) Transit Town Center 51 1,513 1,463 2883% Walnut Creek 33,890 90,294 6,354 18.7% West Downtown (PDA} Suburban Center 1,266 7,077 5,811 459% Contra Costa County Unincorporated 61,016 69,382 8,366 13.7% Contra Costa Centre (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 2,674 3,050 377 14% Downtown EI Sobrante (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 574 2,033 1,459 .254% North Richmond (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 1,154 3,485 2,330 202% Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 710 4,540 3,830 539% West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory 5,727 19,335 13,608 238% Committee: San Pablo Avenue Corridor (PDA) Key: PDA -Priority Development Area, GOA -Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario . ~ Page 54 Marin County Located north of San Francisco across the Golden Gate Bridge, Marin County.offers a retreat for . urban dwellers. Marin is recognized for its natural and agricultural landscapes, which support .local farming and ranching, tourism, recreation, wildlife habitat, and water supply. In fact, more than 50 percent of the county is protected open space, including renowned national treasures such as Muir Woods and Point Reyes National Seashore. The Marin Agricultural Larid Trust and the Marin County Department of Parks and Open Space have worked for decades to protect and preserve the county's iconic landscape. Marin's Priority Conservation Areas encompass a variety of natural resources, including agricultural land, wildlife habitat, and world-class scenery. Marin has worked hard to maintain the ruralcharacter of its western reaches and hay lands through city-centered growth policies and focused development along the urbanized U.S. Route 101 highway corridor. Golden Gate Transit bus service offers connections throughout the county and to surrounding areas, including San Francisco, Richmond, and Sonoma County. Ferry terminals in Sausalito, Tiburon, and Larkspur also connect residents to jobs in San Francisco. In the Initial Vision Scenario, Marin County in 2035 will have the same urban fabric, but existing communities will be more walkable and bikable, and they will support more transit infrastructure and.services. The large number of seniors expected to live in Marin County will be able to choose homes in city or town centers with easy access to the amenities they depend on. A more diverse housing. stock and expanded public transit will increase choices for people of all ages and backgrounds. Transit neighborhoods will be connected along the U.S. 101 Corridor by frequent bus service to local and regional centers. Many will have transitioned away from outdated shopping centers toward more sustainable mixed-use neighborhoods. Transit-oriented growth will include the introduction of planned Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) stations in Larkspur, San. Rafael, and Novato. Downtown San Rafael will be a vibrant city center and transit hub in Marin County, where residents and employees can take advantage of SMART rail service as well as buses. The Civic Center and North San Rafael area will be a transit town center focused around the SMART station. San Quentin-will be a transit town center with connections to the commuter rail station and ferry terminal in Larkspur. These enhanced connections will help alleviate traffic congestion along U.S. 101 and local roads. .Initial Vision Scenario Paae 55 9S abed ~ ou~uaas uoisin izil?u~ I ~ t~~/ - ~ ` /JJ _ i; ~ 1 s~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ r ~ ~ r' 1 ~ ~ C ~ ~ 1 r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ - - ~ 4 t~ r, ' U ~ ~ O~ r" t. ~ S. A„~`~ t ~ o G p 1. - ~ O: i , O ~n °i C ~ t' ~ ' t a. ~ @~ tr ~ ~ ~ Y O ? ~ ? ~,.3~ O i ~ ~.'ha.i~ r U ~ _ r ~ ~ v . _ , . ~ E ~ ~ v~ ~ R ~ T ~ tl ~ 2 G `u' a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ L° ~y ~ E7 - ' Table 3.4::Marin County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 201 D-203 for Priority ~Dewelopntent Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction ~ Nlarrn t;uunty Households Jurisdiction or Area Name Place Type 2010 2035 Growth % Change Belvedere 999 969 20 2.1 Corte Madera 3,948 9,721 773 19.6% Fairfax 3,3D1 3,361 60 1.8% Larkspur 8,036 8,377 341. 4.2% . Mill Valley 6, 267 6, 631 364 5.8% Novato 20,375 21,153 778 3.8% Ross 780 790 1D 1.3% San Anselmo 5,310 5, 370 60 1.1 % San Rafael 23,164 28,209 5,095 21.8% Civic Center/North Rafael Transit Town Center 323 745 421 130% Town Center (PDA) Downtown (PDA) City Center 2,223 5,$24 3,601 162% Sausalito 4, 310 9, 900 9D Z 1 Tiburon 3,844 4,242 398 10.4% Marro County Un;ncorporated 26,162 28,9DD 2,738 10:5% Urbanized 101 Corridor (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 2,046 2,756 710 35% San Quentin (GOA) Transit Neighborhood 80 1,597 7,577 1892% Key: PDA: Priority Development Area GOA: Growth Opportunity Area. Initial Vision Scenario Page 57 (~oo~~o~ Napa County . Napa County is internationally acclaimed for its winemaking; and the picturesque Napa Valley wine region is a major draw for Sari Francisco Bay Area visitors. The valley is bounded by mountains, and the Napa River empties into San Pablo Bay through the narrow Mare Island Strait. Napa County has strong policies to prioritize agricultural uses and to protect farmlands, watersheds, and open space. Consequently, more than 90 percent of unincorporated county falls within those designations. Ten Priority Conservation Areas encompass old-growth redwoods, watersheds, trails, and agricultural areas. Napa County residents' and local governments' farsighted thinking has protected natural resources, increased the amount of cropland, and. supported city-centered growth. Most non- agricultural development is clustered in the four cities and one town connected by Highway 29, «~hich parallels the Napa River in the western part of the county. , In the Initial Vision Scenario Napa County will remain the Bay Area's most rural county. Its winemaking, agriculture, and recreation areas will continue to support tourism. The Land Trust of Napa County and Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District will have conserved more land and provided additional recreational apportunitses. An area targeted for additional sustainable growth is the Highway 29 Priority Development Area. American Canyon will become the gateway to Napa County from Highway 29, and it will have transitioned from an auto-centric environment to a more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly mi,ced- use corridor. Frequent.regional and local bus service and an improved bicycle network will increase mobility throughout the county. 1'he city of Napa will continue to be the largest population center; and it will be connected to other regional centers by efficient bus service. People will be able to shop, stroll by the Napa River, and enjoy other downtown amenities. Buses or a wine.trairi will enable exploration of other destinations. Initial Vision Scenario Page 58 6S abed ~ oueaaos uoisin ie~~~ul ~ 1 ~ ~ `'ti _ ,l`f; ~ ~ ,i'. j c, i r. ~ ~ r' _ r - ~ s_-..._.~- _ ~ I: \~~N r~ ~ ? U ,.-r a - . ~C . O J~ i . "i ? ~ v T ti V i~~ t~ y N c ~ ~ ~ F,c' ~ t _ _ ~ Q { ~ y 1 _ / ` f.y ~ ¢ ,5.. j~ J ? F?. ~ ' q _ gig! , p. ~.A ~ } ~ 3 ~ - Z. p y i P ~ J i 1~ . ~ ,w ~ _ ...53 ~w _,_._....e. r ~ . - ~ (~Z d~~© ~ Table 3.5: Napa Coa~nty Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-203.5 for Priority Development Areas by .Ii~risdiction Na Count ~ . Y Households Jurisdiction or Area Name Place Type 2010 2035 Growth % Change American Canyon 5,761 7,392 1,632' 18.3% ighway 29 Condor (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 264 1,895 1,632 618% Cafistoga 2,140 2,171 31 1.9% Napa 29,990 32,019 2,579 8.8% St. Helena 2,440 2,533 93 3.8% Yountville 1,110 1,230 120 10.8% Napa County Unincorporated 10,370 70,716 396 3.3% (GOAT Key: PDA: Priority Development Area GOA: Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario Page 60 " J_. 1 k'ae~ ~ ~U' 9I 1J _ San Francisco City and County Uniquely a city and county, San Francisco is. one of California's largest cities and home to many . historic landmarks. Sari Francisco city grew rapidly during the Gold Rush in the mid-1800s and became an international center of commerce. Its large port facilitated high volumes of domestic and oversees trade, and during World Wars I and lI, its military installations grew to peak levels. Like many port cities, the convergence of various cultures resulted in a diverse population. Over time the city has emerged as a financial and cultural center, as ~~ell as a major tourist destination. As the city is surrounded on three sides by water, San Francisco has the highest residential and commercial densities in the region. It is one ofahe Bay Area's largest employment hubs, drawing nearly aquarter-million commuters each day, many of whom travel within, to and from the city using the region's most extensive public transit system. - Although it is the most urbanized county in the Bay Area, with more than 90 percent of its acreage developed, San Francisco is home to some of the region's largest urban open spaces, and it has an extensive neighborhood parks system. Five Priority Conservation Areas identified within the city represent critical linkages in this open space network. In the Initial. Vision Scenario, San Francisco by 2035 will have seen a great increase in new residents, businesses, and jobs. Tts unique neighborhoods will have become even more distinct, finely-scaled and walkable. Downtown will continue to grow as a regional center, accommodating . new and growing-businesses that serve the local and global economies. There will be many more high-rise residential buildings, transforming the f nanc.ial district into amixed-use neighborhood with shops, services, and amenities that cater to residents, employees, and visitors. The new Transbay Center will be home to 2,600 new households, a 5.4-acre rooftop park, and the Transit Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. This hub will anchor a new mixed-use neighborhood in the South of Market area. Urban neighborhoods in the southeastern part of the city, such as Hunter's Point and Candlestick Park, will be transformed by new homes, shops, and offices, as well as more parks and increased connections to the waterfront. Other urban neighborhoods, such as the Mission, SoN1a, Chinatown, and .Market & Octavia, will retain their existing character, but with a greater mix of features that can be accessed easily on foot, bicycle, or public transit. Small-scale infill buildings - will have sprang up close to transit lines, especially in transit town centers, such as 19th Avenue and along the Mission-San Jose mixed-use corridor. The Presidio, Golden Gate Park, Mount Sutro, Twin Peaks, McLaren Park, Bayview Park, and Candlestick Point will be connected by a remarkable open space corridor. This green space will connect neighborhoods form a scenic route for bicyclists and pedestrians. Many major streets also will have been greened, resulting in new pocket parks, outdoor seating, community gardens, and communal plazas. San Francisco's transit network will include more reliable; frequent Muni lines and increased ferry service, as well as new transit services, including several bus rapid transit routes. Tlie Transbay Center will be a hub for high speed trains to Los Angeles and other points in California, and it will connect BART, Caltrain, and Muni Metro service. Initial Vision Scenario Page 61 o-~- a = ~ ~ n ~ i; , t 7 f ~ . ~....r......r._.._.__. .~...W n ~ ~ ~ _ ! 3 ,r~~ Jrv ~ ~ f b fs t~ p 'S _ ~ ~ <J O ° - - - - ~ 1. ~ i _ ~ _ x ' _ IJ a z~ _ ~ M ^ j ~ r ~ _ _ 1~ S' Initial Vision Scenario Page 62 Table 3.6: San Francisco City and Coa{nry Initial Vision Scenario household Growth 2010-203 for Priority Development Areas and Grotivth Opportunity Areas , Sin Francisco Co~r~ty Households ' Jurisdictiori or Area Name Place Type 2010 2035 Growth % Change San Francisco 346,68D 936,794 90,114 26.0% 19th Avenue (PDA) Transit Town Center 5,795 8,015 .2,220 38% Balboa Park (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 1,461 3,286 1,826 125% Bayview/Hunters Point Urban Neighbofiood 10,036 21,265 11,230 112°/0 ' Shipyard! Candlestick Point (PDA) Downtown-Van Ness-Geary Regional Center 89,975 109,031 19,056- 21% (PDA) Eastern Neighborhoods (PDA) Urban Neighborhood 29,030 34,386 5,356 18% Market & Octavia (PDA) Urban Neighborhood 10,932 16,605 5,672 52°10 Mission Bay {PDA) Urban Neighborhood 365 5,997 5,632 1543% Mission-San Jose Corridor Mixed-Use Corridor 29,088 30,611 1,523 5% (PDA} Port of San Francisco (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 611 2,904 2,293 375% San Francisco/San Mateo Bi- Transit Neighborhood 1,569 8,127 6,558 418% County Area (with City of Brisbane) PDA)' Transbay Terminal (PDA) Regional Center 509 4;637 4,128 810% Treasure Island (PDA) Transit Town Center 460 7,704 7,244 1575% Citywide (GOAD 166, 849 184, 225 77, 376 10% Key: PDA: Priority Development Area GOA: Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario Page 63 San Mateo County For many decades, residents and businesses have been attracted to San Mateo County because of its strategic location between San Francisco and Silicon Valley, along the waterfront of San . Francisco Bay. The Coast Range divides the county into two distinct parts: the bayside and coast. Ninety percent of development in the county is located on the bayside. Historically, the bayside communities developed as a series of "railroad suburbs" along the Caltrain line that runs parallel to EI Camino Real-the first automobile route through the Peninsula. In contrast, the coast is primarily agricultural, although some residential and office development has appeared in recent years. The seven Priority Conservation Areas in the county are located primarily on the coast side of the hills, and include areas with scenic vistas, agricultural uses, and the habitat of several endangered and threatened species. The downtowns of many of the county's cities, including South San Francisco, San Bruno, .Millbrae, Burlingame, San Mateo, Belmont, San Carlos, Redwood City, and Menlo Park, are clustered near a Caltrain station, often encompassing or bordering EI Camino Real. San Mateo County residents also have access to BART through stations at Daly City, Colma, South San Francisco, San Bruno, San Francisco International Airport, and Millbrae. These downtown areas and transit-served neighborhoods have been the primary focus for growth in San Mateo County..Local governments along El Camino Real are working together to transform the corridor from an auto-oriented commercial strip into a "grand boulevard" that includes a mix of homes, stores, parks; and services, and links the transit town centers and city center nodes along its length. The downtown and transit corridor plans passed by nearly every city in past decades help to promote unique, interesting places, each with its own distinct sense of community. These cities' achievements have protected watershed lands, upper creek headwaters; coastal areas and scenic ridges from encroaching development-preserving natural . resources for the region. - With its central location, transit spine, job centers, and strong downtown areas and schools, San Mateo County will continue to be an important place in the region for sustainable development. iri the Initial Vision Scenario, in 2035, .El Camino Real will have achieved its potential as a place for residents to work, live; shop, and play.z It will be a mixed-use corridor with mid-rise homes and townhouses that connects city centers, transit neighborhoods, and transit town centers to employment centers along the corridor and in San Francisco and Silicon Valley. Outdated strip , malls will have been replaced with well-designed buildings on either side of the corridor that provide new homes and workplaces, as well as shops and restaurants that create an exciting street life. With new trees and improved sidewalks and crossings, EI Camino will be safe for walking and bicycling. Pedestrian routes that cross the railroad tracks and U.S. l 0l will make it possible for more people to bike and walk to work or school. Seniors will be-able to find homes in the city downtowns, with easy access to parks, libraries, and restaurants. An electrified Caltrain will provide more frequent service, with renovated stations that are the focal point for bustling downtowns. Other strategic transit investments, such as new Bus Rapid z brand Boulevard Vision Statement Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page b4 ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ w.i ~j. _ ~ pit 1 ~ Transit routes, expanded bus and ferry service, and high-speed rail stations will make it easy to travel within the county and to reach employment centers throughout the Bay Area. New homes and residents in transit-served areas will keep town centers growing and vibrant, with a wealth of new cultural activities and resources. San Mateo and Redwood City will be the largest city centers, anchoring the largest concentration of jobs and housing in the County. East of the Grand Boulevard, Brisbane and Daly City will create amulti-centered urban area with San Francisco around the Bavshore Caltrain station and Geneva Avenue. The concentration of growth in these bayside communities will have reduced growth pressures on the coast, allowing agricultural areas and seaside towns to thrive. Initial Vision Scenario Page 65 99 a~ad ousuaos uois~n ~~~~iuI x ~ < r l,.a M ' j , ' ~ ~l 1 w Y~1r 11 - r_~ , ~ i; ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ii ~ ~ ~ r' c ~ . o I ~ i ~ L _ Q~ Y . , e, G y is ~ ~ - J. .t' M { ~ - 1 -u ~ R y_ ~ _ . ~ / ~ ~ t ~ r i Py i J~ ~V M ~ ~ ~r4 _ v a , f - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ O 1 <`i ~ ~ ~ l I L ~ ~ G ti .E ~ ~ _ r,' O U @@~ is 3F< ~ ~ .g ~ f •'-E- _ ~ _ ~ ~ z ~ ~ 8 ~ a ~ l g' 4: ~ b j A d L' S R~ N i 6 A ,,.......n:~.~ ~ f - A-.~~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ' ~ Table 3.7: San Mateo County Initial vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-203 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction . ~,in Matefl Couht~l Households Jurisdiction or Area Name Place Type 2010 2035 Growth % Change Atherton 2,490 2,580 90 3.6% Belmont 1D,740 12,759 2,019 18.8% Brisbane 1,730 5,324 3,594 207.7% San Franciscol5an Mateo Bi- Suburban Center 24 3,208 3,184 13129% County Area (with San Francisco) (PDA) Burlingame 13,297 19,431 6,184 46.7% Burlingame EI Camino Real Transit Town Center 6,790 11,477 4,687 69% sPDA) Colma 960 1,372 972 198.3% Daly City 31,261 43,095 11,839 379% Bayshore (PDA). Transit Town Center 1,254 .3,317 2,062 164% Mission Boulevard (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 1,500 2,543 1,043 70% Citywide 28, 041 34, 079 5, 978 21 East Palo Alto 7,780 12,310 4,530 582% Ravenswood (PDA) Transit Town Center 1,149 4,155 3,006 262% WoodlandNUillow UrbanNeignborhood 1,833 2,550 717 39% Nei hborhood (GOA) Foster City 12,210 13,767 1,557 12.8°a Half Moan Bay 9, 990 4, 730 290 6.5% Hillsborough 3,837 4,589 752 19.6% ' ~ Menlo Park 12,432 17,563 5,130 41.3% ' El Camino Real Corridor and Transit Town Center 279 3,258 2,979 1068% Downtown (PDA) Millbrae 8,308 12,910 4,602 554% Transit Station Area (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 176 2,473 2,297 1302% Pacifica 14,320 14,600 280 2.0% Portola Valley 1, 730 1, 780 50 2.9% Redwood City 29,620 91,032 11,412 38.5% Downtown (PDA) City Center 786 6,139 5,353 681% Broadway (GOAD Mixed-Use Corridor 1, 962 2, 325 363 18% Middlefield (GOAD Mixed-Use Corridor 2,370 2,757 387 16% Mixed Use Waterfront (GOAD Mixed-Use Corridor 876 1,916 1,090 179% Veterans Corridor (GOAD Mixed-Use Corridor 308 1, 076 768 249,°0 San Bruno 15,262 21,699 6,937 9Z2% Transit Corridors (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 3,458 7,556 4,099 119% San Carlos 11,909 15,707 3,798 31.9% Raiiroad Corridor (PDA) Transit Town Center 1,022 3,194 2,173 213% San Mateo 38,643 56,678 18,035 96:7% Downtown (PDA) City Center 482 2,111 1,629 338% EI Camino Real (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 23 1,605 1,582 .6794% Rail Corridor (PDA) Transit Neighborhood 23 6,124 6,100 ~ 26204% Key: PDA -Priority Development Area GOA -Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario Page 67 Santa Clara County Santa Clara County developed as a fertile agricultural region, and fruit processing grew into a major local industry and remained vital to the economy throughout the 1940s and 1950s. Through the 1970s and 1980s, aerospace and electronics manufacturing replaced the orchards and packing plants. Santa Clara County has since emerged as the birthplace and now global capital of the high-technology revolution, and is synonymous with "Silicon Valley." Today, with over 1.8 million residents and 900,000 jobs, Santa Clara County is the most populous and job- rich county in the San Francisco Bay Area. The communities within Santa Clara County represent the full spectrum of urban.to rural places found around the Bay Area. From San Jose, with downtown high-rises surrounded by a string of transit-served neighborhoods with village centers, to historic downtown Gilroy-and everything • in between-each of these communities reflects a different history and character even as they grow and change. The cities and county have been coordinating together to manage Santa Clara County's explosive growth for over 40 years. County policies have required that development of land for urban uses occurs within cities, and that each city define an urban service area. Over the past decade, these has been an increased emphasis on transit-supportive land use planning and infrastructure . improvements. Many communities in the county have promoted a more compact growth pattern through General Plan.updates, while other planning efforts have focused on Caltrain and future .BART stations, downtowns, and the El Camino Real corridor. These policies have helped Santa Clara County maintain vita] agricultural and habitat lands in the southern portion of the county and in the Santa Cruz Mountains and the Diablo Range that frame Santa Clara Valley. Many of the 18 Priority Conservation Areas identified in the county encompass key wildlife areas in the foothills. In the Initial Vision Scenario, Santa Clara County in 2035 shows the dramatic results of community efforts to channel much of the future growth in the region into existing downtowns, major mixed-use transit corridors, and town and neighborhood centers. Existing neighborhoods will, retain their existing.character, while providing residents.with new opportunities, access, and destinations. These areas will have become thriving communities for the next generation of entrepreneurs, keeping Silicon Valley at the epicenter of global innovation. They will also be attractive places for an increasing number of older residents, allowing them to stay active and independent while remaining in their community. At the same time, the hills will remain largely undeveloped, providing a stunning backdrop from the Valley floor. Regional transit service along an.electrified Caltrain corridor, the BART to Silicon Valley corridor, and the ACE and Amtrak Capitol Corridor rail lines will provide quick, convenient access to.destinations throughout the region. Shuttle and bus service,.alorig with bicycle and pedestrian routes, will provide direct access from regional transit to the major employment centers in the county. San Jose is expected.to add the most households and jobs of any jurisdiction in the region between 2010 and 2035. It will remain a regional center, and the heart of Silicon Valley. Growth Initial Vision Scenario Page 68 ~I~10`~. in the city will be focused in the downtown and in North San Jose. San Jose's Diridon Station will be the regional portal for those entering Silicon Valley on the California High Speed Rail system. North San Jose will be home to both major employers along the First Street corridor and a string of nearby residential communities and amenities. A large residential community in downtown San Jose will support a diverse array of evening shopping and entertainment destinations. Improvements to the light rail system and new jobs in downtown and North San Jose will have steadily increased the share of south San Jose transit commuters. Areas around the stations along the. BART to Silicon Valley extension, such as the Milpitas Transit Area, will have grown into vibrant residential communities with a mix ofneighborhood- serving retail, parks, services, and other amenities. The transit town centers around the Caltrain stations in Gilroy and Morgan Hill will both be vibrant downtown communities that house netiv residents and also serve the surrounding neighborhoods and visitors with a rich array of shops and events. Central Campbell wilt continue to grow as an attractive destination far area residents, along with the revitalized Winchester Boulevard corridor. Areas devoted solely to lo~v-intensity office and industrial uses, such as Moffett Field/NASA Ames and North Bayshore in Mountain View, will have been transformed into pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly districts with a mix of homes, stores, and parks as well as additional offices. From Palo Alto to San Jose, and including Los Altos, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Santa Clara, the El Camino Real. corridor in Santa Clara County will have transformed into a truly grand boulevard, with quick, reliable bus service and improved bicycle and pedestrian connections linking numerous residential, office, and retail nodes along the entire route. New residents along the corridor will have easy access to Silicon Valley jobs, while Caltrain and light rail will link the major Silicon Valley employers to region-wide commuters. Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 69 i. - i. OL a~zd oi.reuaos uo?srn ~rv~l~~i ~..,._..r~..-......_._.. 4 Fr r 1 t~ V , ! ~ _ 7 ~ ~r Nay ~r t7 a h:; ~ ~ Lam., ~ Yi r`3,'` ~ //L~~`H ~i - r. ~ j t ~ i ~ ~ "s! ~iA ~ i ~-4i`i 4 O qtr ' ~ - u G Cj Y v ~ ;i x,. a~ i c v ~ :i :i t 1 ~ G ~ .y. _ ti tF~ T ~ O ~ ~ s `t^ ~c a -~t Y $ s ~ e~ d ~ ~'T Z r' F ! ~,f ~ ~ f ~ _ - ~ ,fn w ~a-~ ' - ° o t - ~ _~f C~ ~ ~ F ~ k~ - a~, g~~ O r 3, J ~ @ 6 ~ - ~ r r S° 3 ~ f~ ,r _ F r .,r ! i A j ! ~ _ j ~ o y I 1 J ~ ;~r. r`i~J~ _rt c.. t'°--y G ~ s ~ S ° cb+ 3S Y i 7 1~ $'i ~ ' ~ . " u `~S ~ ~ c.~ a E ~ 4!Y ~ ~ ~ j ii ' x ~ ~bZ ~ w¢ W 4 f -g2 ~4 ! w' i ~ s t ~ - i - ~ I e: ,y.:f p ~j p ~ 73 Table 3.8:.Santa Clara County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-203 for Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas by Jzarisdiction Santa Clara County Households - I~.u ~~di~t~~n or A r~,t PJrin~~~~ I'I~ u: [,~j~:, ?010 2035 Gro:~~th Chai~i~r, Campbell 16,892 21,002 4,110 24.3% Central Redevelopment Area (PDA) Transit 965 2,909 1,944 201% Neighborhood Winchester Boulevard Master Plan (GOA) Transit 460 582 122 27°i ~ Neighborhood Cupertino 19,830 27,588 1,758 8.9% Gilroy 14,330 22,118 7,788 59.3% Downtown {PDA} Transit Town Center 235 2,911 2,677 1140% Los Altos 10,670. 11,968 1,298 12.2% El Camino Real Corridor (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 283 612 329 776% LosA/tosHills 3,053 3,088 35 1.1% Los Gatos - 12,930 13,151 721 5:8% Milpitas 19,030 38,758 19,728 103.7% Transit Area (PDA) Suburban Center 454 7,563 7,109 1566% , Hammond Transit Neighborhood (GOA) Transit 2 397 395 19747 % Neighborhood McCandless Transit Neighborhood (GOA) Transit 39 383 344 882,,°i Neighborhood McCarthy Ranch.Employment Center (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 NA Midtown Mixed Use Condor (GOA) Mixed Use Corridor 54 700 646 1197 % ' Serra Center Mixed Use Corridor (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor D 0 0 NA Tasman Employment Center (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 . - NA , Town Center Mixed-Use Corridor (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 0 750 750 NA Yosemite Employment Center (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 NA Monte Sereno 1,229 1,269 40 3.3% Morgan Hill 12,399 20,090 7,641 61.6% Downtown (PDA} Transit Town Center 195 2,911 2,716 1393% Mountain View 32,114 50,348 18,234 56.8% Whisman Station (PDA} Transit 0 1,220 1,220 NA Neighborhood - ~ Downtown (GOA) Transit Town Center 1,359 2,544 1,185 87% ~ East Whisman (GOA) Employment Center 704 2D3 99 95% El Camino Real Corridor(GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 2,561 4, 721 1,560 67% Moffett Field/NASA Ames (GOAD Suburban Center 166 2,283 2,178. 1279% North eayshore (GOA) Suburban Center 278 2, 653 2, 375 853 San Antonio Center (GOA) Transit Town Center 1, 470 2, 732 1, 262 86% Palo Alto 26,705 38,692 11,987 94.9% Palo Alto: California Avenue (PDA) Transit 922 2,889 1,967 213% Neighborhood Palo A/to.~ El Camino Rea! Corridor (GOA) Mixed Use Corridor 4, 272 6,116 1, 845 43 % Palo Alto: UniversityAvenue/Downtown Transit Town Center Z,16Z 3,7D1 1,539 71% (GOAD continued on next page 1 Initial Vision Scenario Page 71 ' I i i . ~1 tai---- ~ ~ `T - `~anta Clara Cc~E3niy (continued) Households J~ rA;LIiL!~unur Pr~.Cl Nnnic PI'ic{~ Type 7010 ?035 ~ Gi{~:~;th io Gf~aiige San Jose 305, 087 435,585 130, 498 42.8% Berryessa Station (PDA) Transit 1,926 8,024 6,098 317% Neighborhood Communications Hill (PDA) Transit Town Center 2,423 5,198 2,775 115% Cottle Transit Village (PDA) Suburban Center 59 2,989 2,930 4952% Downtown "Frame" (PDA) City Center 5,799 24,458 18,659 322% East Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 2,306 6,396 4,090 177% Greater Downtown (PDA) Regional Center 3,217 10,117 6,900 215% North San Jose (PDA) Regional Center 9,488 42,128 32,640 344% West San Carlos and Southwest Expressway Mixed-Use Corridor 8,299 16,923 8,624 104% Corridors (PDA) Bascom TUD Corridor (GOAD Mixed Use Corridor 227 7, 627 7, 400 617% Bascom Urban Village (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 7,089 7,889 800 73% Blossom Hill/Snell Urban Village (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 519 7,619 7,100 272°'0 Camden Urban Village (GOAJ tl4ixed-Use Corridor 346 7,346 1,000 289% Capitol Corridor Urban Villages (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 3,692 9,892 6,200 168;0 Capitol/Tully/King Urban Villages (GOA) Suburban Center 1,504 3,754 !2,250 750% Oakridge/Almaden Plaza Urban Village Suburban Center 2, 302 9, 802 7, 500 326% (GDA) Saratoga TOD Corridor (G0,4) Mixed Use Corridor 7, 495 2, 595 1,100 74% Stevens Creek TOD Corridor (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 1, 066 4, 966 3, 900 366% Westgate/El Paseo Urban Village (GOA) Suburban Center 559 3, 059 2, 500 947% Winchester Boulevard TOD Corridor (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 2,OZ6 4,026 2,000 99% Santa Clara 43,403 67,672 24,269 55.9% Central Expressway Focus Area (GOAD City Center 0 4, 000 4, ODO NA E/ Camino Rea! Focus Area (GDA) Mixed Use Corridor 1,305 2, 783 878 67% Great America Parkway Focus Area (GOA) Urban 0 3, 400 3, 400 NA Neighborhood Lawrence Station Focus Area (GOA) Transit 0 6,194 6,194 NA Neighborhood Santa CJara Station Focus Area (GOAD City Center 767 3, 502 3, 335 7997% Tasman East Focus Area (GOA) Transit 0 7, 805 7, 805 NA Neighborhood Saratoga 1 J,OOO 11,118 118 1.1 continued on next page , Initial Vision Scenario . ~ Page 72 Santa Clara Count`,r~(c~nfinveci) , Households ~ufiShcf~i if'(Uf r`~ft',6 i~ldmii ~'IdLc i~+t3 E COO 1i1~? C~i04Yth=.~ io~.ildfi~.L'.: _ _ . Sunnyvale 54,170 73,425 19,255 35.5% Downtown & Caltrain Station {PDA) Transit Town Center 1,353 5,321 3,968 293% EI Camino Real Corridor {PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 9,466 14,680 5,214 55°'° Lawrence Station Transit Village (PDA) Transit 1,465 2,354 888 61% . Neighborhood East Sunnyvate lTR (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor 1 .601 600 60000% Moffett Park (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 NA Peery Park (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 NA Reamwood Light Rail Station (GOA) Employment Center 0 0 0 NA Tasman Station ITR (GOA) Mixed-Use Corridor ZOZ 805 603 299% Santa Clara County Unincorporated 31,604 37,991 &,386 20.2% Valley Transportation Authority: Cores, 72,190 219,983 147,793 205°a Corridors, and Station Areas (estimate) (PDA) Key: PDA -Priority Development Area, GOA -Growth Opportunity Area . f Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 73 1 I _7 In o ~--1 `r~. `k , . . Solano County. Solano County has the distinction of containing nearly half the San Francisco Bay Area's important farmland and more than half the region's wetlands, according to the State Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The Sacramento River flows along the southeastern portion of Solano County emptying into the Sacramento-San. Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the U.S.'s West Coast, and into the Suisun Bay. Solano County's historical growth was in part attributable.to military bases-Travis Air Force Base and Mare Island Naval Shipyard. The county's location between the metropolitan centers of San Francisco and Sacramento and its lower land prices relative to other parts of the Bay Area made it an attractive place for increased housing development in response to the demand for lower cost housing in the region. Although this housing growth created competition to agricultural uses, residents and local governments in the Solano County value agricultural land protection and have adopted policies to ensure that agriculture remains.. Solano County's Orderly Growth Initiative, adopted. in 1994, encourages city-centered growth and supports the agricultural economy. This policy has focused jobs and commercial areas in and near the county's major urban areas. Vallejo continues its efforts to enhance their waterfront and downtown, and Fairfield, the county seat, has made strides to make the West Texas Street corridor a walkable and bikeable stretch with improved streetscape enhancements. Five Priority Conservation Areas have been identified to encourage protection of important natural resources such as the Blue Ridge Ilills, Western I-Iills, and the greenbelt beriveen Vacaville and Fairfield. As a result of these sustainability policies, the county remains predominantly rural, with valuable grazing and crop lands encompassing more than half of the land in Solano County. In the Initial Vision Scenario for Solano County, communities in 2035 will continue to have striking views of the bay and agricultural landscapes. These natural assets surround the county's cities, which have been redeveloped into thriving centers that are easily accessible by public transportation and filled with places to walk and bike. The cities of Vallejo, Fairfield, and Vacaville will remain the most populous. Vallejo's downtown and waterfront will. be a great place to take in the beauty of the bay or explore the historic city center before or after catching a ferry to San Francisco. Residents of Fairfield who need to commute to Sacramento or to another .Bay Area job destination on the Capitol Corridor train will be able to live in downtown and walk across a pedestrian bridge into Suisun City to the Fairfield/Suisun train station or in the new transit town center around the Fairfield/Vacaville train station, which will have a mix of housing types and retail services with scenic views of the area's striking landscape. Vacaville's downtown will retain its historic character with improved amenities for walking and hiking. Overall, communities in Solano County will have improved transitconnections within their jurisdictions, between jurisdictions, and to regional centers, allowing residents to access a variety of services, jobs,- and entertainment. Initial Vision Scenario Page 74 i ~ . i , I i SL a~zd ~ o~.ieuaos aoisin ~s~~TU~ I _i..-- V ~ _ _ti i _ ~,r c. ~ _ t 1, c rx f; ~ \ ~ _ i i J _ i t ~ G ~ ~ 7 ~ O ~ T ~ .Irk. ~ c „na"~ . ~ \V,\ c G cr; i ~ • ~ i ~ _ ~ G I. ~ ~ 1}`. I "F' +~~i Q 'a ~ ~ - ~ - ~ Q ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ` a o s , i ~ o ~ r~ ~ ~ ti '"'4-~.. _ ~ 7M i'` C'i ' - - r' i iR. _ i N i r „ ` - ~ p ti ~ ~ ~ " 3 ~ ~ - - _ r i j Q . } l V~ 'j g Table 3.9: Solano County Initial Vision Scenario Household Growth 2010-2035 for Priority Development Areas_ and Grotii~th Opportunity Areas by Jurisdiction Solano County Nousehotds Jur ;~I(.(IUf1,Or Area Ndmr, P~ia~ e ~ 201Q 2035 Gr ,nth _ CI a~~~~ _ - - Benicia 11,329 13,527 ____2,198 19.4% Transit Downtown (PDA} Neighborhood _ _ _ 570 1,520 950 167°l0 Northern Gateway (GOA) Suburban Center 0 756 756 NA Dixon 5,617 8,222 1,6D5 46.4% Fairfield 3_6,061 52,97.6_ 16,915 45.5% Downtown South (Jefferson Street) (PDA}. - Suburban Center 142 3,669 3,528 2491% Fairfield-Vacaville Train Station Transit Town _J(PDA) _ Center 10 6,595 6,585 67891% North Texas Street Core (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 49 1 810 1 762 3633% ~Wes# Texas Streef Gateway (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 259 2,784. 2 525 974% Rio Vista 3,590 4,737 1,197 33.8% 'Suisun City ___9_,_1_32 10,548 1,915 15.5% Transit Town Downtown & Waterfront LPDA) Center ___1,146 2,278 1,133 99% Vacaville___ 32,620 91,775 9,155__ Z8.1% Allison Area (PDA Suburban Center 593______ 802 209 35°_/_°_ Transif Town _ Downtown (PDA) • Center 169_ 4,172 4,003 2372% Vallejo 42,043 47,814 5,771 13.7% Waterfront & Downtown (PDA) Suburban Center 1 200 2,215 1 015 85% Solano County Unincorporated 7,817 B,677 860 11.0% Key: PDA Priority Development Area, GOA -Growth Opportunity Area Initial Vision Scenario Page 76 . ~ Sonoma County Sonoma County is the.largest, northernmost county in the San Francisco Bay Area and contains some of the region's most valuable agricultural land. The county has a diverse landscape that encompasses redwood forests and oak woodlands, rivers, wetlands and baylands, vineyards, grasslands,-and small farms. Many of these resource areas are included as part of one of the county's 15 Priority Conservation Areas. Urban development in Sonoma County is concentrated within cities along the U.S. 101 corridor; which has been supported by voter-approved urban growth boundaries and other policies that encourage separation between cities and scenic landscapes to maintain the county's rural character and economy. The existing bus service in the county will be enhanced by the introduction of Sonoma-Marro Area Rail Transit (SMART). The stations planned in Cloverdale, Healdsburg, Windsor, Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Cotati, and Petaluma will provide improved connections among the cities in the county and to employment oppommities in San Francisco. Tn the Initial Vision Scenario for Sonoma County, by 2035, the area's agricultural economy and resource lands will be thriving as a result ofvoter-approved sales taxes to fund the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District's purchase of conservation and agricultural easements. Cities and towns in Sonoma County will have filled in while retaining their character, providing great places to live and work with access to daily needs within walking distance or an easy bike or transit ride. Downtown Santa Rosa is expected to take on significant population and employment-growth, and will continue to be the major city center in the North Bay. This area will connect to Sartta Rosa's historic railroad square area, which will have a thriving farmer's market for people to access local foods. Residents will have an easy commute on the rail line, bus line, or regional bicycle path. North of this station in Santa Rosa will.be a new suburban center, where the .improvements residents identified for the area will connect them to the mall and other key destinations. Santa Rosa residents and visitors. will also be able to get to and from these stations through a bus rapid transit system along Sebastopol Road, an east-west mixed-use corridor, and Mendocino Avenue/Santa Rosa Avenue, anorth-south mixed-use corridor. 7'he cities and towns north and south of Santa Rosa wit] have retained their community character _ -and have improved transit,. bicycle, and pedestrian connections. Commuters and tourists will be able to hop on the rail line and take it to Cloverdale's transit town center; which will provide an impressive greenway connection between its downtown and the station. Similar to Windsor's town green where residents and visitors can gather, Rohnert Park will have a suburban center at Sonoma Mountain Village, a star example of sustainability principles for the Bay Area and the world. People will be able to enjoy downtown Petahima's historic character as they walk around taking in the amenities offered and the beauty of the Petaluma River. Sonoma County's rural and suburban areas will Have become more complete communities with services and amenities within walking distance. The Airport and Larkfieid Urban Service Area will be a suburban center with a mix.of residences and other services. Within the Sonoma Valley Urban Service Area, The Springs will be a .rural mixed-use corridor where residents can safely Initial Vision Scenario 'Page 77 navigate Highway 12 and where traffic will have been reduced given the level of bus service through the area, and the Eig}ith Street Industrial Area will be an employment center with major industrial redevelopment to serve agricultural processing in the area, better transit service, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements. The Penngrove Urban Service Area will have became a . rural town center, with better transit service, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and increased retail and service uses. Initial Vision Scenario Page 78 6L a~~d ou~uao~ uo~s~n ~etliui _ ~ yq@2! T. = i ~ 7 - ~ ` _ ti ` ~ 11 y ~ ~ l C~~} 1 t, r - 6 ~:rr~~ rr G j ~ _ _ ~ ~ j: ,z 1. ~~l/r`te' . - - a .r `r~ c I ~ fi =r t.?. a, r k" f1 O. ~ ;f ~ 0.1 E ~ ~ V i ~ r ~ s ~ ~ R o 9. ~ v 4 y V 3 ~ z ~ ? ~ ~ u 'L f G\ P ~ - _ ~ j 3 a FBI . - - ~Gr dF'J m _ E ~ ~ ~ ~:1. i ~ a ~ ~ a,. r ~ ~=a `~Zn-~-ra ~ Table 3.10: Sonorna County Initial Vision Scenario Household Grativth 2010-2035 for Priority . Development.Ar•eas crud Grnwth Olipprtunity Areas by,Iurisdietion Sonoma C©unty Households - iun~clictipn or r1 ~ i N ~~i_e i'iuc~.~ ~l ype 201~i_ 2035 C;rowth Cl.t~nge Cloverdale 3,211 4,639 1,428 44.5% Downtown/SMART Transit Area (PDA) Transit Town Center 486 1,552 1,066 219% • Cotati _ 2,832 3,387 555 19.6% Downtown and Cotati Depot (PDA) T_ra_nsit Town Center 183 72$ 545 298°!0 Healdsburq 4,390 5,289 894 2D.4% Petaluma 21,775 24,713 2,938 13.5% Central, Turning Basin/Lower Reach (PDA) Suburban Center 591 2,159 1,568 265°l0 Rohirert Park '15,718 20,395 4,677 29.8% Sonoma Mountain Village (PDA) Suburban Center 209 2,795 2,585 1235% Santa Rosa 62,886 83,010 20,124 32.0% Downtown Station Area (PDA) City Center 1,442 9,296 7,855 545% Mendocino Avenue/Santa Rosa Avenue Corridor (PDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 6,391 _11,068 4,677 73% Sebastopol Road Corridor {pDA) Mixed-Use Corridor 2,809 ~ 9,098 6,290 224% North Santa Rosa Station (GOA) Suburban Center 4, 433 7, 618 3, 785 72% . Sebastopol 3, 325 3, 595 270 8.1 Nexus Area (PDA) Transit Town Center 96 259 163 170% Sonoma _ 4, 476 5, 036 560 12.5% Windsor - 8,884 13,809 9,-925 55.4% Redevelopment Area (PDA) Suburban Center '611 4,459 3,848 630% Sonoma County Unincorporated 60,933 67,505 6,572 10.8% 8th Street East lndustria! Area (GOA) Employment Center • 0 0 0 _ NA AirporULarkfield Urban Service Area (GOA) Suburban Center 2,403 ~ 483 1,080 45% Penngrove Urban Service Area (GOA) Rural Town Center 312 958 696 207% Rural Mixed-Use The Springs (GOAD Corridor 6, J61 7, 414 .1,153 20% Key: PDA -Priority Development Area, GOA -Growth Opportunity Area • Initial Vision Scenario Page 80 4. KEY PRIORITIES ANll POTENTIAL STRATEGIES , The Initial Vision Scenario supports the development of places that offer proYi.mity to services and transit and accommodate the region's growth. This future land use pattern represents a clear shift towards decreased auto dependence and increased travel choice. Intensified land uses close to rail and ferry stations and high frequency bus corridors throughout the region will promote more regional and local transit trips, as well as an increase in local trips on foot and bike- enabling cost-effective and healthy travel patterns for future generations. This section outlines key priorities and potential strategies that regional agencies will need to pursue in order to support sustainable development and achieve the objectives set forth in SB375, given the rationale; growth assumptions, and local input into this Initial Vision Scenario of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. 4.1 Key Priorities Through the development of the Initial Vision Scenario, a number of key priorities for supporting implementation of the SCS have become clear. These priorities are based on an understanding of the policies and resources needed to support sustainable development in the full range oflocally-identified place types in the region, which define specific qualities and needs for the Priority Development Areas and new Growth.Opportunity Areas. Elevating these priorities in the SCS will provide consistency in implementing sustainability strategies and making related investment decisions. At the core of these priorities are the alignment of transportation, housing and employment development in sustainable locations, transit and transit-supportive investments to 2035, and coordination among local, regional; state and federal agencies to address challenges and achieve co-benefits: 1. Develop an efficient, interconnected travel network that offers inviting walking, biking, and transit connections that serve a network of neighborhoods and allow residents and employees throughout the region to take shorter trips. 2. Plan for jobs-housing ft along subregional transit corridors in order to provide housing . choices with easy access to job centers and reduce the percentage of long commutes. 3. Enhance transit access in PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas to integrate each area as part of a larger transit corridor; create destinations for surrounding lower density residential areas; and provide residents and employees in these areas with core services, amenities, and access to the rest of the region. 4. Align regional transportation funding with production of sustainable and affordable housing by connecting land use strategies and transit investments; increasing the feasibility of affordable housing production, and prioritizing transportation investments in places that are assuming major responsibilities on sustainability and affordability Initial Vision Scenario Page 81. ~~~~o~~ 5. Invest in smart, green infrastructure by planning.for air quality impacts at the 'neighborhood level, implementing urban stormwater standards for neighborhoods, and using appropriately-scaled municipal roads and utilities standards. 6. Coordinate regional plans and environmental regulations, including those related to air quality, water quality, and protection of the Bay in order to streamline CEQA review and clearance for land use plans in PDAs and Growth Opportunity Areas. 7. Initiate partnerships with key entities and special districts to address key challenges to sustainable development, including water supply and distribution, hazards and risk mitigation, regional economic development, school quality and access, and utility capacity. 4.2 Potential Strategies Local jurisdictions and stakeholders have provided the regional agencies with numerous suggestions as to what potential strategies could be adopted through the SCS. In an era of fscal contraction for public agencies, funding for the SCS planning and implementation effort will be critical. While the Initial Vision Scenario will rely on the regional transportation plan for implementation funding, the region must also look for new funding opportunities and new partners to jointly fund SCS-related plans, projects, and programs in addition to affordable housing development. Looking further into the future, the following lists some of the strategies that will respond to the key priorities listed above. These strategies incorporate much of the input from local governments about what is needed for SCS implementation: ] . Develop an environmental impact report for the SCS that resolves regional policy conflicts, addresses major transportation and air quality issues; and provides coverage for local plans. 2. ' Maximize the use of the Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCF.,A) to streamline CEQA review for local development plans that achieve the goals of the SCS. 3. Identify transportation funding sources for additional and sustained planning money for cities planning for growth and complete communities. 4. Prioritize RTP funding for an efficient transit network that supports the core urbanized land pattern accommodating growth in the region, including transit investments, transit service expansion, parking pricing, and transportation demand management projects. 5. Expand the Bay Area Affordable TOD fund that will help make sites available for affordable housing development in key locations within PDAs, and develop appropriate mechanisms for land assembly and affordable housing production. ' 6. Develop a mechanism to fund land preservation and Priority Conservation Areas. Initial Vision Scenario page 82 ~~o~io~ 7. Develop a structure for an infrastructure bank that wilt offer cities financing to expand utility capacity. 8. Develop regional advocacy for fiscal reform to support cities that are accommodating growth, including new redevelopment mechanisms. 9. Initiate planning for the region's resilience related to seismic hazards, and adaptation planning within the region for climate change, including potential flooding in areas proximate to the Bay and reduced water supply in the event of extended droughts. 10. Develop a structure for reserving water supply for .P.DAs and Growth Opportunity Areas. l 1. Foster improvements in school quality and access by facilitating dialogue between school districts, planning agencies, and transportation agencies and by identifying strategies and resources to meet the specific needs of local jurisdictions. 12. Develop an economic development strategy that maximizes the regional resources in terms of business performance, skilled labor, and international networks. This strategy would need to be developed in coordination with various stakeholders and regional agencies. Initial Vision Scenario Page 83 ~~o~ ~ ° ~ 5. SCS NEXT STEPS Over the next several months, regional agencies will discuss the Initial Vision Scenario with local elected officials, local staff, stakeholders and the public. The input received during these discussions will influence the analysis for the development of the Detailed Scenarios. This . section describes the process for gathering feedback about the Initial Vision Scenario, as well as a preliminary set of analytical tasks that MTC and ABAG have identified for the development of the Detailed Scenarios. Figure S.l. shows the process and timeline for completion and adoption of the SCS: ~.1 Initial Vision Scenario Outreach Process MTC and ABAG are embarking on amulti-tiered approach to interact with local jurisdictions and other stakeholders. As part of this effort; ABAG and MTC staff are coordinating the efforts listed below: . Briefings for local elected officials. in each county -Meetings are scheduled in all nine counties during .March and early Apri1201 1, to engage with elected officials and discuss issues pertaining to the communities they represent and the SCS process. City managers and County administrators will be invited to participate. A tool kit is also being prepared for elected offcials who wish to conduct meetings in their communities. City Council /Board of Supervisors presentations - At the local level, planning and community development directors will be presenting the Initial Vision Scenario before their city councils or the board of supervisors. MTC and ABAG will provide a report, PowerPoint presentation and a jurisdictional comment form that will guide the discussion and provide consistency for the collection of input from local elected officials. Planner-to planner briefings -Regional planning staff.~vill organize a Planning Directors' Forum in each county to provide technical brie .fangs with key local planning staff to discuss the results of the Initial Vision Scenario analysis. Stakeholders meetings - In addition to the input gathered from multiple stakeholders at the Regional Advisory Working Group meetings, ABAG and MTC will schedule meetings focused on selected tasks to discuss the scenario analysis and strategies. Countywide workshops -Regional planning staff, in coordination with CMAs and local staff, will conduct public workshops in all nine counties to facilitate a discussion on the development of county visions and priorities for transportation projects. Partnersleips with community organizations -MTC and ABAG are partnering with community and faith-based organizations, as well as local nonprofits, to involve low-income communities and communities of color in development of the SCS planning scenarios. Other outreach efforts- Later this spring we will conduct a telephone survey of Bay Area residents on topics such as housing and development patterns, and their views on a range of Initial Vision Scenario Page 84 strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Also, ahigh=profile, interactive web presence, electronic newsletters, and social media are planned to beep those interested up to date and engaged in the development of Plan Bay Area. Figure 5.1: SCS Planning Process and Timeline j - 1 - Rerli~nal,Plan, - ~ Init~' ial Vision GH(; :'Pr rtor~tian~c d ~ r ~ Taryrt: ~ f 3rg~~~t ~~-~--Anal s,is 1 ' ~.~j - - ~ . Y ~`---'~'o~ >SeptemLer ,ti ~~oJa vary" - '`~Februery~` .March ' N N . . Project ' Transportation Policy 8 Caltfor performance Projects. ~ ' a 'Investment Discussions !I Assessment ' . ..........................o Preferred Detailed Scenario&Analysis ..SCS Scenan - . ~ ~ r/ r „r sin ~ ~icnd Allosdtl ui ' " - ~aj.~~, Region ~I Hsu: _ _ -1 i " "j , ; ~ : n, N F=-Y;r i ,~~i 't I ';Ongoing LocalEnyaye:ment ~ Public Outreach _ .-r._ - '-~I~. ~ ~ f~ fir= J'~ ,f j1_=~,f r1" "1ii R liGn~l ~ ~usind Need 4~I~~,atinn ~ t,~ ~ ,y~-!~ u?3 Draft Environrncntal Impact Report < Draft RTP/SCS Plan :~'"Gt o' January ~ Noverr ,December N EIR ~ / ~ sF.- Certification ~ 1_ _ . Puy lie, ~ Plan _ i\ Ado ti~~n ~'~t - _ 813 c t :a . ~ Initial Vision Scenario Page 85. $$~.--1 5.2 Development of Detailed Scenarios Several nest steps exist in soliciting and collecting feedback on the Initial Vision Scenario, which will. need to be undertaken in coordination with local jurisdictions, as listed previously.. Similarly, several tasks remain to develop the Detailed Scenarios: • The development of the SCS requires a forecast of a twenty-five year land pattern, which takes into account market and public investment constraints. The Detailed Scenarios will define those constraints. The employment distribution was established using secondary data and based on previous forecasts (Current Regional Plans Forecast and Projections 2009). For the .Detailed Scenarios, we will use additional state and federal data sources to review the distribution of existing jobs. We will then develop alternative forecasts of job distribution through the place type approach, including an analysis of clusters and industries. We will develop a scenario with a higher proportion of employment growth in Priority Development Areas and Growth Opportunity Areas in order to move closer to the goals identified in the . regional performance targets. • Similarly, the Initial Vision Scenario relies primarily on the transportation network proposed in Regional Transportation Plan 2035, The Detailed Scenarios will consider alternative approaches to the expansion of transit services and transportation projects that are supportive of the proposed land pattern. The Detailed Scenarios will define the alternative packages of transportation policies, strategies, and investments required to achieve targets utilizing alternative land use . patterns and housing distributions. a The Detailed Scenarios will take into account the policies utilized by the RHNA methodology. ABAG and MTC.will be working with the SCS Housing Methodology Committee (HMC) to develop an approach for allocating the eight-year regional housing need to each jurisdiction in the region that meets the statutory objectives of RHNA and is consistent with the development patterri of the SCS. The HMC will discuss the criteria for consistency between RHNA and the SCS, and how best to meet local and regional sustainability goals. Initial Vision Scenario Page 86 6. APPENDIX 6.1 Glossary of Terrris Alternative Planning Strategy (APS) - If the SCS is unable to achieve the greenhouse gas reduction target, then an APS must be prepared. The APS would show how the greenhouse gas targets would be achieved through alternative development patterns, infrastructure investments, or additional transportation measures or policies. The APS is a separate document from the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), but may be adopted at the same time as the RTP. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 -The Global ~~~arming Solutions Act of 2006, which requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 Scoping Plan -The scoping plan developed by the California Air Resources Board (GARB} has a range of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction actions which include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non- monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-based mechanisms (such as acap-and-trade system), and an AB 32 cost of implementation fee regulation to fund the program. The plan is a central requirement of AB 32.. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) -The council of governments and designated regional planning agency represent the San Francisco Bay Area's nine counties and - 101 cities and towns. ABAG initiates innovative programs, projects, and partnerships to help ,resolve the region's economic; social, and environmental challenges; providing research and . analysis and cost-effective local government service programs. ABAG is committed to enhancing the quality of life in the Bay Area by leading the region in advocacy, collaboration, and excellence, in planning, research, and member services. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) - BAAQMD regulates industry and employers to keep air pollution in check and sponsors programs to clean the air. BAAQMD also works with ABAG, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Iv1TC), and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) on issues that affect land use, transportation, and air quality. Say Area Regional Agency Climate Protection Program -This program was approved by the Joint Policy Committee (JPC) on July 20, 2007. As part of this process, ABAG established targets for assessing alternative land use scenarios in the development of the latest.iteration of Projections 2009, the region's policy-based forecast of population and employment. MTC developed the RTP update, Transportation 2035, which evaluates transportation strategies and investment programs relative to a target of reducing GHG emissions from on-road vehicles in the year 2035 by 40 percent compared to 1990 levels. , Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) - Astate-established agency with jurisdiction over dredging and filling of San Francisco Bay and limited jurisdiction over development within 100 feet of the Bay. Initial Vision Scenario Page 87 i9 ~ California Air Resources Board (GARB) - part oEthe California Environmental Protection _ Agency. Its mission is to promote and protect public health, welfare, and ecological resources through the effective and efficient reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering the effects on the economy of the state. SB 375 requires that GARB set GHG-reduction targets for cars and light trucks in each California region for the years 2020 and 2035. California Environmental Quality Act.(CEQA) -This California law passed in 1970 requires that documentation of potential environmental impacts of development projects must be submitted prior to development. Under SB 375, housing development projects can qualify for a full CEQA exemption if: • They do not exceed 8 acres or 200 units • They can be served by existing utilities • They will not have a significant effect on historic resources • Their buildings exceed energy efficiency standards • They provide any of the following: - 5 acres of open space - 20 percent moderate income housing - 10 percent lo~v income housing . - 5 percent very low income housing. Carbon Dioxide (COQ) - COZ is a colorless, odorless, non-poisonous gas that is a normal part of the ambient air. COZ contributes the most to human-induced global warming. Human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and deforestation have increased atmospheric concentrations of COZ by approximately 30 percent since the industrial revolution. Clean Air Plan (CAP) - At a public hearing on September 15, 2010, the BAAQMD Board of Directors adopted the final Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan, and certified the Final Environmental .Impact Report on the CAP. The 2010 CAI' serves to update the Bay Area ozone plan in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 10 of the California Health & Safety Code. In addition, the 2010 CAP provides an integrated, multi-pollutant strategy to improve air quality, protect public health, and protect the climate. Climate Change -Climate change refers to changes in the Earth's weather patterns, including the rise in the Earth's average temperature due to an increase in heat-trapping or greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere. Climate scientists agree that climate change is a man-made problem caused by the burning of fossil fuels like petroleum and coal. Transportation accounts for about 40 percent of the ;Bay Area's GHG emissions. Climate change is expected to significantly affect the Bay Area's public health, air qualify, and transportation infrastructure through sea level rise and extreme weather.events. Complete Communities -Complete communities are those which provide the opportunity for people to live a complete day, including their work, school, services, and recreation, within the boundaries of their own neighborhoods. Complete communities offer these amenities in a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. where public transit is at least as convenient as the automobile. These neighborhoods or districts are self-sufficient by connecting transit and shopping, and are surrounded by different housing types, services, and amenities. Complete communities are Initial Vision Scenario Page 88 ~ ~o created through an_integrated approach to transportation planning, land use planning, and urban design with an inter-related set of policies that mutually reinforce one ariother. Current Regional Plans Forecast --Current Regional Plans Forecast refers to the forecast of housing and employment based on the assumptions in ABAG Projections 2009 and some input . from local jurisdictions. It reduces employment growth expectations for 2035 given the current recession and economic restructuring. _ Detailed Scenarios -Following development of the Initial Vision Scenario, Detailed Scenarios that account for available revenues will be developed, analyzed and discussed as part of the Plan Bay Area process. (See also Initial Vision Scenario and Preferred Scenario.) . Equitable Development -Equitable development ensures that individuals and families in all communities can participate in and benefit from economic growth and activity. It is grounded in four guiding principles: the integration of people and place strategies; reduction of local and regional disparities; promotion of "double bottom line" investments; and inclusion of meaningful community voice, participation, and leadership. FOCUS - A regional planning initiative spearheaded by ABAG in cooperation with NI.TC, and in coordination with BAAQMD and BCDC. FOCUS seeks to protect open space and natural resources while encouraging infill development in existing communities (see PCAs and PDAs below). The FOCUS initiative encourages future growth in areas near transit and Lvithin the communities that surround the San Francisco Bay. Concentrating housing in these areas offers _ housing and transportation choices for all residents, while helping to reduce traffc, protect the environment, and enhance existing neighborhoods. Focused Growth -Development that reflects higher densities, mixed use, and a higher proportion of housing and employment gro~vtll in urban areas, particularly near transit stations and along transit corridors, as well as in town centers. Growth Opportunity Areas -Locations in the region identified by local jurisdictions during the development .ofthe Initial Vision Scenario with.potential capacity for growth. These areas may be in the process~of becoming PDAs or have different criteria to pursue sustainability focused on employment or rural characteristics. Global Warming -The progressive gradual rise of the Earth's average surface temperature thought to be caused in part by increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gas (GHG) -Gas in an atmosphere that absorbs and emits radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect, tivhich causes warming of the atmosphere of the Earth. Initial Vision Scenario - As part of Plan Bay Area, the Initial Vision Scenario articulates the Bay Area's vision of future land uses and assesses its performance relative to statutory greenhouse gas and housing targets a's well as other voluntary performance targets. The Initial Vision Scenario is unconstrained by available revenues. As such, it serves as a starting point for Initial Vision Scenario Page 89 the development, analysis and discussion of Detailed Scenario alternatives that will lead to a preferred scenario by early 2012. (See also Detailed Scenarios and Preferred Scenario.) Joint Polley Committee (JPC) -The JPC coordinates the regional planning efforts of the ABAG, BAAQMD, BCI)C and MTC. Among the JPC's current initiatives are focused growth, climate protection, and development of a sustainable communities' strategy pursuant to SB 375. Low-carbon emissions standards or low carbon fuel standards (LCFS) -California's LCFS requires :fuel providers to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the state, dramatically expanding the market for alternative fuels. By 2020, the LCFS will reduce carbon content in all passenger vehicle fiiels sold in California by l0 percent. Metropolitan Planning Organization (MP4) - A regional council of governments authorized under federal law to develop a regional transportation plan: Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) -The transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. MTC is the MPO for the Bay Area. MTC is currently working on its 2035 Transportation Plan. Particulate Matter2,; (PMZ.;) -Fine particles are 2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller. The regional target is to reduce fine particulate matter, PM2.5, by 10 percent below today's levels. Particulate Matter ~o (P1VI,o) -:Particulate matter of 10 micrometers or less in size. The regional target is to reduce coarse particulate matter, PMio, by 45 percent over today's levels. Performance Measures - lndicators of how well the transportation system or specific transportation projects will improve transportation conditions. Place Types -Groups neighborhoods or centers with similar sustainability characteristics and physical and social qualities, such as the scale of housing buildings, frequency and type of transit, quality of the streets, concentration of jobs, and range of services. Place types are a tool of local-regional exchange to identify places and.policies for sustainable development. Bay Area jurisdictions can select a place type to indicate their desired level of growth in the Sustainable Communities Strategy. Plan Bay Area -One of our region's most comprehensive planning efforts to date. It is a joint effort led by ABAG and MTC in partnership with BAAQMD and BCDC. All. four agencies are collaborating at an unprecedented level to produce a more integrated land use-transportation plan. .Priority Conservation Area (PCA) -Regionally significant open spaces for which there exists a broad consensus for long-term protection and for which public funds may be invested to promote their protection. Local jurisdictions.and open space agencies identified these locations voluntarily through the FOCUS initiative. Initial Vision Scenario Page 90 . °i-~~,~c°~ Priority Development Area (PDA) -Locations within existing communities that present infill development opportunities, and are easily accessible to transit, jobs, shopping and services. Local jurisdictions identified these locations voluntarily through the FOCUS initiative. Reduction Target - A goal set by California Air Resources Board for a region to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks within a specific timeframe. RAWG (Regional Advisory Working Group) - An advisory group set up to advise staff of ABAG, MTC, BAAQMD and BCDC on development of Plan Bay Area. Its membership includes staff representatives of local jurisdictions (C11~lAs, planning directors, transit operators, public works agencies) as well as representatives from the business, housing, environmental and social justice communities. Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) -The Regional Housing Needs Assessment process is a state mandated planning process for housing in California. ABAG is responsible for allocating this state-determined regional housing.need among all of the i3ay Area's nine counties and 101 cities with assistance of a recently established SCS Housing Methodology Committee. The SCS Housing Methodology Committee is currently evaluating the factors to be used by ABAG in the current allocation process. Beginning in this current cycle, RHNAs must be consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) mandated by SB 375. Local housing elements must be adopted l8 months after the next regiona[ transportation plan. RHNA Integration - RHNA must be consistent with The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). SB 375 requires that the .RHNA/housing element cycle will be synchronized and coordinated with the preparation of every other RTP update, starting with the first update after 20.10 (i.e., 2013). RTP updates occur every four years; and housing elements must be adopted by local governments eighteen months after the adoption of the RTP. With a few exceptions, the region will now be on an eight-year RHNA cycle and local governments will be on eight-year housing element cycles. In addition to synchronizing with the preparation of the RTP and the SCS, the RHNA allocation must be consistent with the development pattern included in the SCS. The resolution approving the RI-INA shall demonstrate consistency with the Bay Area's implementation of SB 375 and the SCS. Regional Performance Targets -Both ABAG and MTC used performance targets in developing the Regional Transportation Plan and Projections 2009. Performance targets include limiting greenfield development to 900 acres per year, or 22;500 acres over the 20l 0-2035 time period. Additional targets include increasing non-auto access to jobs and services by 20 percent, by 2035, and reducing daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita by 10 percent, compared to 200b levels. Other targets include increasing access to jobs and essential services via transit or walking by 20 percent above today's levels; reducing driving per person by 10 percent below today's levels; reducing traffic congestion, measured by hours of delay, by 20 percent below today's levels; and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent below 19901evels. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) - A transportation plan which is developed every four . or five years that, among other things, outlines a region's transportation investments. T'he Bay Area's Regional Transportation Plan is called Transportation 2035 Plan and it is the long-range planning document of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The plan has a 25-year Initial Vision Scenario Page 91 ~t~~ 1 horizon and serves as a comprehensive blueprint for investment strategies for maintaining, managing and improving the surface transportation network.in the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. The plan determines how the region wilt spend nearly $218 billion in local, regional, state and federal funds that are projected to be available to the Bay Area over the next 25 years. SB 375 Transportation and Land Use Planning Act of 2008 -'The act mandates an • integrated regional land-use-and-transportation-planning approach to reducing greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions from automobiles and light trucks, principally by reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). SB 375 requires that the California Air Resources Board (GARB) set GHG- reduction targets for cars and light trucks in each California region for the years 2020 and 2035. SB 375 provides incentives for creating attractive, walkable and sustainable communities and revitalizing existing communities. SB 37~ also changes the state Housing Element law by linking regional planning efforts for transportation and housing. Under the bill, all transportation and housing planning processes are put on the same eight=year schedule and must be updated once every eight years. The Sustainable Communities Strategy, RTP and.RHNA will be developed together through a single and integrated cross agency work program with the J`PC. SB 375 Implementation - SB 375 explicitly assigns responsibilities.to ABAG and to the M. TC to implement the bill's provisions for the Bay Area. Both agencies are members of the Joint . Policy Committee (JPC). The polices in this document were approved by the JPC and provide guidance to the rivo lead regional agencies in fulfilling their responsibilities in collaboration with their JPC partners, BAAQMD and BCDC. Sustainable Communities Strategy {SCS) -Apart of the Regional Transportation Plan'that predicts a likely grotivth pattern for the region. The SCS lays out how emissions reductions will be met. This strategy becomes part of the Regional Transportation Plan. It does incorporate the 1ZHNA requirement to provide housing to accommodate all. income groups while meeting reduction targets. SB 375 requires the regional transportation plan for regions of the state with a metropolitan transportation planning organization to adopt an SCS. Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCEA) -The Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCEA) is the CEQA document that wilLbe prepared to review `transit priority projects' that are consistent with the adopted Sustainable Communities Strategy. The SCEA is not required to reference, describe, or discuss growth inducing impacts or any project-specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck trips generated by the project on global warming or the regional transportation network. The lead agency's decision to review and approve a transit priority project with the SCEA shall be reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) - A type of development that links land use and transportation facilities to support public transit systems and help reduce sprawl, traffic congestion and air pollution. Transit-oriented developments include housing, along with complementary public uses (jobs, retail and services), at a strategic point along a regional transit system, such as a rail hub. Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) - M.TC's TLC Program provides funding for projects that provide for a range of transportation choices, support connectivity between • Initial Vision Scenario Page 92 transportation investments and land uses, and are developed through an inclusive community planning effort. The purpose of TLC Program is to support community-based transportation projects that bring new vibrancy to downtown areas, commercial cores, neighborhoods, and transit corridors, enhancing their ameriities and ambiance and making them places where people want to live, work and visit. Transit Priority Projects -Projects that contain at least 50 percent residential use; have a minimum net density of 20 units per acre; have afloor-area ratio for the commercial- portion of - the project at 0.75; and are located within'/~ mile of either a rail stop, a ferry terminal, or a bus line with 15-minute headways. Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 93 6.2 ~MTC Station Area Planning Mandal Place Type Identification Matrix . suogsaab6uil~guagiRvx gg fi d~ s O Imo... ~ A R ~J' ~,`p7ee3 G S M ~ u~ j ~ ~ m C Q fi n= E~ q y m ' ~ m3 m 2E8S 3_ ~ ~ ~q'i ~ ~'~O & E ~e _ ~ ~~w ~ ~Em m~~ tOa9v S ~i a~ _ ~ 8 x v a O r ~ ~ b ~ c~ v rn ~ 7'E L ~ -c~ $ ,d' now 4r,tEa mA ~ ~ a 1552 c O 'a c °a''~ 'L ei cd ajT ~ °.3 ~ ~ 4rj° y. a ~ r ~ tC, .Z C ~ ~ [lei ~ a i ° ~ m ~ fn U c_ ~ F a~ ~~u b~ ~ a.~s 6 .a p ~11 fli a ~ ~ ~ w A~~' fi5 I y ~T S { ~ ~ - •=A c''xv~ }.i~ 3 y pP ~ 3 ~ ~ tai' IIII 3 ~ 4~ P C j G U ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~u , y ~ ~ o ~ ~ ? ~ r~ fl $ ~ ~ ~ n ~ o ~ tct fir? ~~ro ie~ w _ tt pp PP ~ N J ~ ~ ? 'U E ~ y _ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v m ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ti r v I ~ as ~ s tr~ .,Y c ...___._._.e..._ i U ~ L _ ~ ta'N G ~ 1 "5i 3~ ~sr a~ II.a ~ g •,~v W i c - P Qo ti d E~ -3 -o ~~'r: u~ yv~ c >J _s ~ o ~ c 9o- ~ ° ~.A . _ s_ 9 y~+N _ d and w -p _ ~ a c ~i°~» z~o h EVV a ~.~8$~ _ i ~ i D ~ mY ~ ~ C t Niti sungsanp BUI+VRnaD1 daH l sa}npi _V..__.._..~.._.__.___._,_._1 Initial Vision Scenario ~ Page 94 _ fV i Q ~ ~ v oZ ~ Q ~L (Q a ~ ~'--a ~ rye Q.1 ~ s] u~ w. e Q ~ O Q m u, m ~ F•-I ~ Q in ~ U o U ~ I j I t ~ i ~ , ro ~ i. i. 1` l s~ ~ d ~i a z f 1. \ ~ ~ .J~ G ~ r ` 1 j ~L 1 I! f 'i (L i 3 it oa vavtt/ssbt J ~ ~ Qa VLNtb'SSI~l ~U ~II~~~ ;i ' ~ 1 I ~t ~ i' ! t `I 78 Q 2 iI ! m 9 x tr m I(n~\11 i. ~ j ~ ,i m o i--I - ~ ~ s5 ~ d ~ , s-~, ~r- - o vaNaiwN __1 _....,,.,,.._.,_-t.~..,....,a...._.,,_,9...,...h ~ M O LL ~ w j ~ N ~ O ~ ~ W S o a%N ~ .c Q ~ g ±c o lr ~ r ~ c ~ ° a o 0 p ~ ~ ~ t-~- o ~ _ i o a~ a a r LL > _ 3 ~y ~ - - ~ ~ , m s , +'1h~~..- ~ . voN~t~ior~lEac -~n*..°~'4t~'Ya+~~-`~~~ ~ i`~.vt~~s~~ ~.,:.:..:y aviaa diovesv., ,+~~~,.ax,.h~+, 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ i„~._ I i 4. ~ ^ i. v ~x~ ~ .F.. _ ~ ~ ~ I a~ N `aq~ ~ ~ . 'L a J _ -tZ„ JJ ~Y F. ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ sr } gg~f Iu; - _.leiT,t~s:•. ~'*Jav tY`9:;xS+ C~ ~ ~ ~ i i~ ~ ~Y ~ ~ KI ~g ~ ~0190 _ _ ,r. ~ fi,~t' 1J ~ ~ ~ Fl~lil'0C11S=-',~$'sie.`A~xt~`~°.,;~':s'::' ..~~~-,.VSO 3Fi~f7©l~daY~'.'.ae,'c.° ~.'di~"'~O: F~, ! nea ,:xau'. ~~~yyy,,, _ Aga9° ~ m ~ o L Q al ~1 7] ~ e o Q" t0~ ~ ~ 9 a w ~°o Q ~ o ~ fl.. ~ o. cn I ti o ~ o .'6=;. ~ }cry ~+`"+,k; . i ~4~ Sd ~~q Irk 4 ` ,`f//\ e ~ i t i'e C \'Bh .ifiA~ aeYF / 'l~ O. J ti ?yi Q _~y yt , t J .~w1 g~ J 'mss ~~s.1 a'''~3'~ ' ~ o. 'r,,` ~ i =ti w , p. S ~ ~ ~ o~ L ~'vp1 `tea r~ 7 `'~tl~d;=~ 'f/']~: L R § .k~~y ;x'.^/.t' fit„ Y Fi x it r ~ T ~ ~ asp. a ~ k \s ~o ry ntv RO~~ 3 C ~y'AM.~~ ~ ~ sar. ,sew ~ ~ r9' ~i¢ .s ~ eP~© ~ v ~ C7 L uKi:.M1 ~ ^Z D 1. .c-x +r'~'~ t ~ ~ .i ~u 'k~.f"" v L,::'9~y'ntW ~~~~g~g.~~a•~~ - ~ 1i i^rZbtn in w ~m _ _ . , E . A _ ~ r-. ~a - _ _ C.~ ~ l~~ ~ ~ ~ i 4~ 1 o ® ~ K- o i~ 4 ~ t` f ~ ' _ ~ ,1 ~ i ' a I ~ C~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4`t gg~~ ~ 1 ~ fl i 5; 1 € r 1 _ > f .Ia ~ k r., t , ..t , r ~ I i` 1 _ t I r, i c ~ ~ r . ~ F: ~!l c 4i_- ~m .SHY ~ ~ ~ .3 'r i' ~ ~ r--~ / tr 't~//~ / ~ ~ ~ :3 ~ ~ _ i,<<~, 1, r 1 S'--- I f; ~ ~y~ ~ r., ~ _ , - ~ ~ J f ~ ~ t ~ ~ r~ - ~ f - ~i, dew/' 6; i ~ I ~a } t,~, f ~ r' , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r y ~ y~ _ p~~^ 5 ` m . - r ~ v ~ s-. / ~ , f I~ ~ a / ~ ~ a ~ ( ~ ~ ~ J o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ti: ~ - rr j}i v0. . y_~ n ,p ti ~ ~ c i k ~j O ' E a ~ ~ a b G7 ~ ~ _ S w ~ a y ~ o a o ~ U ~ U o p~~ 4 ~ d~ ~ 7 ~ _ ~ m ~f " ~ ' ~ ~ o L. z a 4 zy° ~ b o Q A q~ °a o E' ~ ~ p I~ ! _ N f 3p ..r,,r.~^'~ ~ t ~ ~ U _a ~ ~ ry ~ ~ w a o ~y* i°a ~ m 5a ul ~ 1H r / ~ ~v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~P~ d~4 A a 4 ~ k Z • yy pp Y C{ ~ _ _ - { jA~ . ~.~..~_e~ ~ A'd'TAC~IMENT S m 1_^~yy v ~ n ~ , *Jp .0 C ^l c x F ~ s a "J O x _ Y C a m- yy E g p n~ o° v_ o o y~ u~ y w ` q a ~ Q ~ S O ~ 6 i NRy k? O~ ~ n U" 2 N ~ S O ~ z ~ u E rc i S a'" 4 ro E" ; p u 4 g4 p~ ~ r 3 i- ~ ~ F M~ 2 Z S to 3 S S U~ , V) 6 d N N: Vi, o , : ~ n - _ - ~ , ~ afl i~u ~ i ;z ~ ~f4 r~ D ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ 1 J, i al - _ OJ m i ,i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ aV _ Q n "r `ur^rorjrr ~ ~ V 1 ~v _ J 1 ~s sri ~ w L=~ 5 a _ s < g 3 ~ ~ ~ " ~ S q ~h ~ ! u~~~~ 4 1 3 ~ C ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .o ~ 1 ~ _ ~ J ~ u ivw ~ ~ I I .m„ ~ V 13 wt `~j?e~ ' ' ;:o ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ t~ o l._ d03lYRCNWd$- ~ ~ i ~ ~ l7 '.J ~i_'v~v ~.:i JFl VIA7 VIM4'6 16 AG`QC47T(!fa ~ ~ - ~SbyNA 9 Y P) 4 h y, ` isr,vkyo , ~ ^ ~y'~ -a ~ v c,~3daYa2btcft, i z O c ~ t . . i } "i a 1 . W ; ~ rye o c +aa. t ~ ` nuav~.v~w.r - ` € A~~~_ ~ . ~r _ ti i x a , ' r' t 1 . ~is h3onn c ~ vlva3,ia~ ' 1: _ -o 1S AfiMNdl.- ~ ~ ; . . ° ~ .a ' _ i0 1NdDYH ~ i G`~~ OP ©U~~ti ~ a; CITY OF DUBLIN ~ ~ .100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 94568 Website: http://www.dublin.ca.gov O~L1F'pR~~~ May 25, 2011 Metropolitan Transportation Commission • Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 8th Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 ' Association of Bay Area Governments , Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 8th Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 . Subject: Initial Vision Scenario Questions for Elected Officials To Whom It May Concern: Following the release of the Initial. Vision Scenario in March 2011, local jurisdictions were asked to solicit input from their elected officials on a series of questions. Those questions and the City of Dublin's response to them are as follows: 1) Is the proposed place type appropriate for your Priority Development Area(s)?. Given the availability of resources, is the proposed urban scale, mix of uses, and expected household growth appropriate? All of Dublin's PDAs have a Place Type designation of "Suburban Center". The City feels That this is the most appropriate Place Type designation based on the characteristics of Dublin's 3 PDAs (Dublin Town Center, Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area). The City does not believe. fhat the • Initial Vision Scenario's expected household growth rate is appropriate and recommends That the allocation of housing units be adjusted fo align with the City's current Planning documents for each PDA.. This would include 6, 072 housing units in the Dublin Town Center PDA; 3, 300 housing units in the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossing PDA; and 7, 300 housing units in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan PDA. 2) What transportation improvements would help to support those Priority Development Area(s) in your jurisdiction? Transportation and infrastructure has been sized to accommodate the development potential anticipated by the City of Dublin. The allocation of housing units within .the Initial Vision Scenario exceeds what is planned and likely to occur within the Dublin Town Center and .Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs. Therefore additional Area Code (925) • City Manager 833-6650 • City Council 833-6650 • Personnel 833-6605 • Economic Development 833-b650 Finance 833-6640 Public Works/Engineering 833-6630 ~ Parks & Cocnmunity Services 833-6645 ~ Police 833- Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610 • Building Inspection 833-6620 • Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606~~ACH1VIENT 7 analysis would need to be done. Street improvements and pedestrian enhancements within the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA would help support'and encourage planned transit oriented development within this PDA by making streets and sidewalks more pedestrian. friendly. Improvements to the Iron Horse Trail from Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard and the widening of Dougherty Road to accommodate fransif and bicyclists would encourage and facilitate greater pedestrian and bicycle access fo the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings PDA. Additionally, a pedestrian and bicycle bridge overcrossing along the Iron Horse Trail at Dougherty Road and at Dublin Boulevard would increase pedestrian and bicycle safety at these roadway crossings. 3) What additional funding would be needed to support housing growth? . The City does not believe that the Initial Vision Scenario's expected household growth rate is appropriate and recommends that the allocation of housing units be adjusted to align with current City of Dublin Planning documents for each PDA. The maximum development potential for each PDA is as follows: - - - PD~4 - Revise°d F'D~ • ,IVS ~ Priority Deveioprlient-. ~ ~ Area (PD,4) ~ ~Heusing Unit Housing Unit Housing ~L1nit. ~ Difference ~ I~,~~rmber f~utnber iVurnber Dublin Town Center 4,108 6,072 6,672 ..+600 Dublin Transit Center/ 3,796 3,300 2,541 -759 Dublin.Crossin s Downtown Dublin 541 1,300 2,156 +856 S ecific Plan • Totals 8,445 10,672 11,369. . +697 4) If the Initial Vision Scenario growth estimate is too high, should some of the growth be shifted, to another part. of your jurisdiction, elsewhere in the County or elsewhere in the region? The City of Dublin feels that the Initial Vision Scenario growth estimate exceeds what is planned for the Dublin Town Center and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs and is lower than what is planned or. anticipated for the Dublin Transit Center/Dublin • Crossings PDA. .Some of the development potential could be shifted from the Dublin Town Center and/or Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs to the Dublin Transit ~ ` •Center%Dublin Crossings PDA; however Dublin's PDAs are not planned to accommodate all of the housing units the Initial vision Scenario allocates. The City of Dublin believes the job growth identified in fhe Initial Vision Scenario falls short of the actual potential growth. The Cify estimated 44,909 jobs at ultimate build out with approximately 97,994 of those jobs being within PDAs. 5) What are the challenges for your local jurisdiction to attract and retain jobs that match your local workforce? The physical layout of Dublin as a linear community primarily along the J-580, lends itself to being attractive for retail uses, Thus retail jobs. This is in stark contrast to the housing stock and real estate prices in Dublin, which attract a' skilled, high wage workforce that exceeds what the market can provide in retail-oriented jobs. With respect to the market Area Code (925) • City Manager 833-6650 • City Council 833-6650 • Personnel 833-6605 • Economic Development 833-6650 Finance 833-6Cr't0 ~ Public \~orks/Engineering 833-6630 ~ Parks & Community Services 833-6645 -Police 833-6670 Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610 • Building Inspection 833-6620 • Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606 ~ ~ `7 for office development, Dublin sits between two of the largest business pars n~Northe~ California with ample space to accommodate users.. However, Dublin has found a niche with a limited amount of campus office and corporate office for businesses wanting • visibility .that comes with being located along I-580. When it comes to industrial lands, . the land values and development fees are generally too high to support construction of large scale industrial development. We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the Initial Vision Scenario 'and respectfully request that the housing unit allocations and job growth projections to our three Priority Development Areas be adjusted in the Detailed Scenario to reflect the development potential planned for in existing City of Dublin Planning documents. Regards, Jeri Ram, AICP Community Development Director CC: Joni Pattillo, City Manager -Chris Foss, Assistant City Manager - ~ Jeff Baker, Planning Manager , - Marnie Waffle, Senior Planner G'1SC5 -Sustainable Communities Strategyllnitial Vision ScenariollVS Comment Ltr to ABAG.doc Area Code (925) • City Manager 833-6650 • City Council 833-6650 • Personnel 833-b605 • Economic Development 833-6650 Finance 833;6C>40 • Public Works/Engineering $33-6630 • Parks & Community Services 833-6645 • Police 833-6670 Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610 • Building lnspcction 833-6620 ~ Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606 ''l OP D~j~~~ f . ~ 10© Glvia Plaza, Dublir~,.Califom(a 94568 - Webslfe: hffp:llwwvsr.dubliri.ca.gav May 20, 2071 - • Metropolitan Transportation Gomrnlssion Joseph P. Bort MetroGenter 101 Street ~ . Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Association of Bay Area Governments . Joseph P. Sort MetroGen#er ~I 101 8~' Street Oakland, GA 94607-4756. Subject: -Initial Vision Scenario Questions far Elected Officials - - ~I • To Whom l#_Nlay Concern: ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ Following the release of the lni#iai Vision Scenario in March 201 local jurisdictions wer®. ~I asked to sQliclt input front their elected officials on a series of questions, At the May 17., 2011 Dublin Gity Council matting, Staff•posed the questions provided by. AsAG to the Gi#y Council ICI and obtained their approval to forward the following responses: 1) is the proposed place type appropriate for your Priori#y Development Area(s)? Given tl~e availability of resources, is the proposed urban scale, mix ~of uses, and expected household growth appropriate? ~ II - - ~ I AlI of Dublin's PDAs have a Place Tyfie designafion of "Suburban Center'; The Cify I feels that this • is the most ~ appropriate Place Type designation based on the characteristics of Dublin's 3 PDAs {Dublin Town Center, Dublin Transit Center/publln Crossings and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area}. The Cify is unclear as to fhe rationale for the allocation of housing units within designated F'DAs and does not beliEVe thaf the lnifia! Vision Scenario's expected household growth rate is appropriate. The pity requests fhat fhe allocation of housing units be adfustec! fo align with Dublin's current - Planning documents for each PDA. This would fnclude.6,472 housing units in the Dublin Town Center PDA; 3,300 housing units in •fhe Dublin Transit Canfer/Dublin Crossing PDA; and 1,3E?p housing units in the Dvwnfown :Dublin Specific Plan PDA, Area C©de {926 • Cify Manager 833-6650 •Cify Councli 833-6850 • Personnel 833.6505 • ~conomia Development 833-$650 finance 833-8840 • Public Wnrksl~ngfneering 833-6630 • Parks & Community Services 833-6546 • Police 833-6670 PiannfnglCoda Enforcemen# 833-6610 • Building Inspee#ian 833-6520 • Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6605 ~ Metropolitan Transportation Ca~~lmission ' Association of Bay Area Governments ' Page 2 of 3 • . May 2Q, 20~ 9 2) What transportation improvements would help to support those priority Development • Areas} in your jurisdiction? - Transpartaflon and infrastructure has been sized fo accommodate the development pofenfial anticipated by the City of Dublin, Tfre allocation of housing units -within fhe Ini#la! Vision Scenario exoeeds wh~f is planned, and Ilkeiy fo occur, wil`hin, fhe Dublin . Town Center and Downfawn Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs; therefore, additional analysts would need fo be stone: Sfreef improvements and pedestrian enhancements within fhe Downfown Dublin Specific Plan A. rea PDA would help support and encourage planned transit oriented developmenf within this PDA by making struts and sidewalks more pedestrian friendly. lmpravemenfs fo the Iron Norse Trai! frorr~ Dougherty Road fo Dublin Boulevard and the widening of Daugherty Road fo accommodate transit and bicyclists would encourage and facilitate greater pedesfrian atld bicycle access fo the Dublin Transif Center/Dublin Grossirrgs PDA. Additionally, a pedestrian and bicycle bridge overcrossing along fhe Iron Norse Tsai{ at Daugherty Road and of Dublin Boulevard would increase pedestrian and bicycle safety at these roadway crossings. ' . 3) What additional funding would be needed to support housing growth? . ~ ~ . Tice Glfy of Dublin is unclear as fo the rationale for the allocafion of housing units within designafed PDAs and does naf believe 'fhaf the Initial Vision Scenario's expected household growth rafe is appropriafe. The Gify requests fhaf the allocafion of hat~sing units be adjusted to align wifh current City of Dublin Planning documents for each PDA. . The maximum development pafenfla! for each .PDA is as follows; Dublin Town CenterT _ 4,108 5,072 ~ ' 6,672 ~ +640 . Dublin Transit Canter/ 3,796. 3,3U0 2,541 -759 Dublin Crossin s Downtown Dublin 541 ~ 1,300 2,156'- . +856 5 eCific Plan Totals 8,445 '10,672 • 1't 369 x-697 , 4} if the Initial Vision Scenario grow#h estimate is too high, should s©me of the c~rawth be shifted to mother part ~of your jurisdiction, elsewhere in the County or elsewhere in the region? I The Initial Vision Scenario growth estimates exceed what is planned far the Dublin Tawn Center and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs and is lower than what is planned or anticipated for the Dublin Transit Center/l~ubiin Crossings PDA, Same of fhe development potential could be shifted from fhe Dublin Town Cenfer and/or Downfawn • Dublin Specific Plan Area PDAs fo the Dublin Transif Center/Dublin Crossings PDA; Area Code (926) • City Manager 833-8554 • City CaunClfi 833-8654 • Personnel 833•ti645 • i;conomlc [7eveiopment 833-6650 i='finance 833-6540 • PubEfic WorksfEnginearing 833.6830 • Parks & Community Services 833-6645 • Police 833.8670 Planning/Code enforcement 833-66't0 • l3uilding inspection 833-682Q • dire Prevention Boreau 833-8646 ~ Metropoll#an Transparfation CflErlmfssion • - Associa#inn of Bay Area Governments _ ~ . Page 3 of 3 ~ - May 24, 2411 ~ . however, Dublin's PDAs are not planned• to accommadafe al! of the. housing t~riits fhe initial vision Scenario allocates. The City of Dublin believes fhe job, growth iden€ifi~d in fhe Jni#ia!• ~Iision 5cer~ario fa11s shoo of the aefua! potential for growth. The Cify estimates 44,9x9 jobs at ultimate build out with approximately 97,994 of those jobs.being'wlthin PDAs. Dublin is a major job center in the Tr%Valley and has zoned up fa 2 million. square feet of. campus office development at fhe Dublin Transit Centers an acldltianal 950,500 square of- Off#ce development along wifh a 95t7-room hotel has besn~zoned ~for~af the West Dublin.BAfiT . ~ Station. - - - What are the challenges for your focal jufisdietion to attract and retain jvl~s that match your focal workforce? ~ - ~ - Ths physical layout of Dublin as a .linear community primarily along 1-580, lends r'tself t0 • ~ -being aftractlva for refal! uses, thus retai!• jobs. This !s in .stark confrasf to the housing stock and real estata prices !n Dublin, which atfrpct a skilled, high wags workforce. That . - exceeds wha# the market can provide ire, retail-oriented jabs. -With respect to fhe rI-tarlsef - for office develapmenf, Dublin sits between two of the largesf business parks•iri~Norfhem - Callfornia with ample -space to accommodate users. However, Dublin has found a-niche with campus office and corporate office for businesses wanting the .vislblllfy thaf comes . - - with being located along 1-580. This creates~the potential for attCacfing high pay-ink jobs . in a -variety of office secfors and capturing Borne of the workforce ~a`haf commutes from fhe San Joaquin Valley, When it cornes~ fa industrial ~ lands, tie-.land values and development fees are generally loo high to support construction of large -scaleindustrial development, - ~ - - VI!€3 appreciate fhe opportunity to review and comment on the initial Vision -Scenario and respectfully request that the housing unit allocations and Job growth projections to our three - . Priority Davefopment Areas be adjusted in the Detailed Scenario to reflec# the development potential planned for in existing Gity of Dublin Planning dvcf~ments. - ~ j Regards, - - ~ - - - . Jeri am, AICP ~ . Gomm~inity Devalapment Director - I CC: Joni Pattilla, CI#y Manager Ci~ris Foss, Assistant City Manager Jeff Saicer, Planning Manager - - Marrlle V?laffla, Senior Planner ~I - - Area Code (925) •Cify Manager 833-fi650 •Cify Caunefi 833.8650 • Personnel $33-6605 • Economic pevelppmenf 833-6650 Finance 833-5640 • Public WorkslEnginearing 833-663D • Parks ~ Community Services 833-664a • Police 833-8670 PlanninglCode ~nrorcement 833-68'i0 • Building inspection 833-6624 • Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6806 Off' nU~~~ STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK ~ CITY COUNCIL File #430-50 DATE: February 7, 2012 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJECT: Sustainable Communities Strategy Alternative Land Use Scenarios Prepared by Marnie R. Delgado, Senior Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) are preparing a Sustainable Communities Strategy for the nine-county Bay Area region in accordance with Senate Bill 375. The Sustainable Community Strategy is a 25 year land use strategy for the Bay Area that identifies areas to accommodate all of the region's population, including all income groups, and forecasts a land use pattern that when integrated with the transportation system reduces greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. To date, five land use scenarios have been development and measured against two transportation networks and 10 performance targets. ABAG and MTC are soliciting comments from local jurisdictions on the five land use scenarios. Each scenario includes housing and employment distribution patterns across the region to support equitable and sustainable development. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact at this time. Future implementation of the Sustainable Communities Strategy could have financial impacts which are not known at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the report and direct Staff to provide comments to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). ~ . ~a~~..~ - . Submitted By Reviewed By Director of Community Development Assistant City Manager Page 1 of 11 ITEM NO. 7.2 DESCRIPTION: Background Senate Bill 375 became law in 2008 and calls for the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for all metropolitan regions of California. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have been charged with preparing the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the nine-county Bay Area region. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a land use strategy that will attempt to coordinate land use with the transportation network in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. To that end, housing and jobs will be concentrated in areas with easy access to transit. The SCS land use strategy will also influence the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) which is a key component of the General Plan Housing Element. The Sustainable Communities Strategy will be adopted in 2013 as part of the Regional Transportation Plan. Initial Vision Scenario On May 17, 2011, Staff presented a report to the City Council on the Initial Vision Scenario (Attachments 1 and 2). The Initial Vision Scenario was the first attempt to create a regional land use plan for the Sustainable Communities Strategy based on projected growth rates in the Bay Area of 2 million people and 900,000 housing units by 2035. The Initial Vision Scenario focused on concentrating the projected 900,000 housing units within designated Priority Development Areas (PDAs). The City of Dublin has three PDAs: 1) Dublin Town Center; 2) Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings; and 3) Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area (Attachments 3-5). The Initial Vision Scenario also included job growth projections. According to ABAG, Dublin is one of the major East Bay job centers in the Tri-Valley along with Pleasanton, Livermore and San Ramon and continues to attract a range of businesses. According to the Initial Vision Scenario, job growth in Dublin was projected to increase 85% by 2035. The distribution of jobs was to be further analyzed by ABAG and MTC in the Detailed Scenario which was to be the next phase in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy. At the City Council's direction, comments were provided to ABAG and MTC on the Initial Vision Scenario and included concerns over the distribution of household growth in each of Dublin's Priority Development Areas. Staff requested that the projected household growth in the SCS align with current Planning documents (Attachment 6). Detailed Scenario Renamed Alternative Scenarios In July 2011, based on feedback received from local jurisdictions on the Initial Vision Scenario, ABAG and MTC approved the framework for 4 additional scenarios known as the Alternative Scenarios. These Scenarios were developed in lieu of the Detailed Scenario and will be used to inform the development of the Preferred Scenario which will be adopted as part of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. The Alternative Scenarios include: 1) Core Concentration Unconstrained; 2) Focused Growth; 3) Core Concentration Constrained; and, 4) Outer Bay Area Growth (Attachment 7). Page 2 of 11 To date, five land use scenarios have been developed, the Initial Vision Scenario and the four Alternative Scenarios. The Initial Vision Scenario and the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario are based on unconstrained growth and assume a very strong employment growth as well as unprecedented funding to support housing affordability. These two scenarios accommodate the revised projected housing need for over 1 million households by 2040. The remaining three land use scenarios (Focused Growth, Core Concentration Constrained and Outer Bay Area Growth) are "constrained" scenarios and are based on an assessment of economic growth, financial feasibility and more reasonable planning strategies. These three scenarios reflect the expected housing production of 770,000 housing units but fall short of meeting the projected future housing need of over 1 million units by 2040. All five land use scenarios are summarized as follows: • Initial Vision Scenario: Concentrates housing and job growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs) based on input from local jurisdictions on the level of growth they can reasonably accommodate given resources, local plans and community support. • Core Concentration Unconstrained: Concentrates housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area. • Focused Growth: Recognizes the potential of PDAs throughout the region with an emphasis on major transit corridors. • Core Concentration Constrained: Concentrates housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area. • Outward Growth (formerly Outer Bay Area): Higher levels of growth in the inland areas of the Bay Area; closer to past development trends. Scenario Analysis To analyze the impacts of the five land use scenarios ABAG and MTC paired them with one of two transportation networks and then measured the five land use scenarios against 10 specific performance targets related to the economy, environment and social equity (Attachment 8). The performance targets are summarized as follows: 1) Reduce C02 emissions per person from cars and light-duty trucks. 2) House projected regional growth. 3) (a) Reduce premature deaths from exposure to fine particulate emissions. (b) Reduce coarse particulate emissions. (c) Achieve greater particulate emissions reduction in highly-impacted areas. 4) Reduce injuries and fatalities from all collisions. 5) Increase the average daily time walking or biking per person. 6) Direct new non-agricultural development within urban footprint. Page 3 of 11 7) Reduce housing and transportation costs as share of low-income household's budgets. 8) Increase Gross Regional Product (GRP). 9) (a) Increase non-auto mode share. (b) Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per person. 10) (a) Improve local road pavement condition index (PCI). (b) Reduce share of distressed state highway lane-miles. (c) Reduce share of transit assets exceeding their useful life. The results of the Scenario Analysis were released on December 9, 2011 at a joint meeting of the MTC Planning Committee and ABAG Administrative Committee (Attachment 9). Of the five land use scenarios, there was not one scenario that performed significantly better than any other. All five land use scenarios exceeded the targets established for reducing premature deaths from exposure to fine particulate emissions (Target 3a) and increasing the Gross Regional Product (Target 8); however, in the other categories, all five scenarios fell short of meeting the established targets. In a handful of instances, the performance results worsened. For example, rather than reducing injuries and fatalities from all collisions by 50% (Target 4), they increased 18-26% across all 5 land use scenarios. Equity Analysis In addition to the Scenario Analysis, an Equity Analysis was performed to see how the five land use scenarios performed against five specific equity measures (Attachment 10). The equity measures are summarized as follows: 1) Share of income spent on housing and transportation costs. 2) Share of today's overburdened-renter households at risk for displacement based on future growth patterns. 3) Average daily miles of vehicle travel per square kilometer in residential and commercial areas near major roadways. 4) Average travel time in minutes for shopping, visiting, recreation, etc. 5) Average commute travel time in minutes. The results of the Equity Analysis were released on December 9, 2011 concurrently with the Scenario Analysis. The Equity Analysis focused on the impacts the five land use scenarios would have on communities of concern compared to the remainder of the region (Attachment 11). Similar to the Scenario Analysis, there was not one scenario that performed significantly better than any other. Staff has reviewed the household and job growth projections for all five Scenarios and prepared a response letter to ABAG and MTC (Attachment 12). Page 4 of 11 ANALYSIS: Household Growth Projections All five land use scenarios include projected household growth Citywide and by Priority Development Area. The Initial Vision Scenario and the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario assume 1 million additional households across the region by 2040 while the remaining three Scenarios assume 770,000 additional households. As noted above, 1 million housing units is the projected housing need while the 770,000 housing units reflects projected housing production. Table 1 below provides a comparison of ABAG's 2040 household growth estimates across all five land use scenarios. Table 1. ABAG 2040 Household Growth Estimates by Land Use Scenario (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Initial Core Focused Core Outward Vision Concentration Scenario Concentration Growth Scenario Unconstrained Constrained Scenario Scenario Scenario Downtown Dublin Specific 2,309 1,643 1,822 1,262 2,127 Plan Area PDA Town Center PDA 7,120 7,503 5,895 5,895 6,460 Transit Center PDA 2,454 3,736 3,204 3,204 3,970 Total In PDAs 11,883 12,882 10,921 10,361 12,557 Total Outside PDAs 23,247 20,794 17,803 15,452 18,134 Citywide Total 35,130 33,676 28,724 25,813 30,691 Table 2 below provides a comparison of the City's 2040 household growth estimates based on current Planning documents and projects which are currently in process (i.e. SunCal/Camp Parks) and ABAG's 2040 household growth estimates. The City Estimates have been refined since the Initial Vision Scenario and reflect the most current household growth projections. For example, 334 existing housing units within the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA were previously not accounted for and the number of proposed housing units for the SunCal/Camp Parks project has increased from 1,500 units to 1,600 units. The data presented in Table 2 for each of the five land use scenarios reflects the difference between the City's estimates and ABAG's estimates shown above in Table 1. For example, a positive number reflects an overestimation by ABAG and a negative number reflects an underestimation when compared to the City's estimates. Page 5 of 11 Table 2. City of Dublin 2040 Household Growth Estimates versus ABAG 2040 Household Growth Estimates by Land Use Scenario City (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Estimates Initial Core Focused Core Outward Vision Concentration Scenario Concentration Growth Scenario Unconstrained Constrained Scenario Scenario Scenario Downtown Dublin 1,634 +675 +9 +188 -372 +493 Specific Plan Area PDA Town Center PDA 5,949' +1,171 +1,554 -54 -54 +511 Transit Center PDA 3,400 -946 +336 -196 -196 +570 Total In PDAs 10,983 +900 +1,899 -62 -622 +1,574 Total Outside PDAs 17,718' +5,529 +3,076 +85 -2,266 +416 Citywide Total 28,701 +6,429 +4,975 +23 -2,888 +1,990 X334 existing units as of 2011; 1,300 new units per the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan 2Based on approved entitlements and units remaining per the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan 385 units could be added if the Area GPublic/Semi-Public site is converted to residential 41,800 units at the Dublin Transit Center and 1,600 units at Camp Parks/SunCal 52,021 units could be added if the following are entitled: Doolan Canyon (1,990), Positano Public/Semi-Public (12) and Area FPublic/Semi- Public (19) Staff has analyzed the household growth estimates for each of the five land use scenarios. Below is a summary of how each scenario performed when compared to the City's estimates. The City's estimates are based on current Planning documents including the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. Any additional housing units, above and beyond what is currently planned for in these documents, would require amendments to the General Plan and/or applicable Specific Plan, environmental review and an evaluation of infrastructure needs. In some cases, the amount of land available for development may not be able to accommodate the number of units allocated in certain scenarios. Initial Vision Scenario Household growth estimates for the Initial Vision Scenario were released in May 2011. At ABAG's request and the City Council's direction, Staff submitted comments on the Initial Vision Scenario (see Attachment 6). The estimates have been revised slightly by ABAG and, as described above, the City's estimates have also been further refined by Staff; however, the estimates in the Initial Vision Scenario still do not align with the City's current Planning documents. Housing units are overestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (675 units) and Town Center PDA (1,171 units) and are underestimated in the Transit Center PDA (946 units). Citywide, housing units are overestimated by almost 6,500 units. While the goal of the Initial Vision Scenario is to concentrate housing and job growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs) based on input from local jurisdictions on the level of growth they can reasonably accommodate given resources, local plans and community support, it does not appear that the comments previously provided by Staff were incorporated into the revised household growth estimates for the Initial Vision Scenario. Staff has incorporated this comment into the draft letter to ABAG and MTC (see Attachment 12). Page 6 of 11 Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario Household growth estimates for the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario are overestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (9 units), Town Center PDA (1,554 units) and Transit Center PDA (336 units). Citywide, housing units are overestimated by almost 5,000 units. While the goal of the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario is to concentrate housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area, it appears based on the overestimation of housing units that additional growth was allocated to Dublin's PDAs and Citywide even though Dublin is not located in the Inner Bay Area. Focused Scenario Household growth estimates for the Focused Scenario are relatively close to aligning with the City's estimates across all PDAs and Citywide but overestimate housing growth in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (188 units) and underestimate housing growth in the Town Center PDA (54 units) and Transit Center PDA (196 units). Citywide, the Focused Scenario only slightly overestimates total housing units (23 units). The Focused Scenario reflects the potential of PDAs throughout the region with an emphasis on major transit corridors. With the exception of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA, the allocation of housing units in this Scenario is generally consistent with current Planning documents for each PDA as well as Citywide. Core Concentration Constrained Scenario Household growth estimates for the Core Concentration Constrained Scenario are also relatively close to aligning with the City's estimates across all PDAs and Citywide but underestimate housing growth in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (372 units), Town Center PDA (54 units), and, Transit Center PDA (196 units). Citywide, the Core Concentration Constrained Scenario underestimates total housing units by almost 3,000 units. The Core Concentration Constrained Scenario reflects a concentration of housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area. This supports the underestimation of housing units in all PDAs and Citywide as growth is shifted from outlying areas of the region to the urban core. Outward Growth Scenario Household growth estimates for the Outward Growth Scenario are overestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (493 units), Town Center PDA (511 units), and, Transit Center PDA (570 units). Citywide, housing units are overestimated by almost 2,000 units. The Outward Growth Scenario reflects higher levels of growth in the inland areas of the Bay Area and is intended to align closer with past development trends. However, this Scenario overestimates housing growth in all of Dublin's PDAs and Citywide. Page 7 of 11 Based on the analysis of household growth projections, the Core Concentration Constrained Scenario most closely aligns with the City's current Planning documents (the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan). This Scenario concentrates housing growth at select PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area and shifts growth from the outlying areas of the region to the urban core. Employment Growth Projections All five land use scenarios include projected employment growth Citywide and by Priority Development Area. The Initial Vision Scenario and the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario assume nearly 1.5 million additional jobs across the region by 2040 while the remaining three Scenarios assume nearly 1 million additional jobs across the region by 2040 with ajobs-to-household ratio of 1.3. Table 3 below provides a comparison of ABAG's 2040 employment growth estimates across all five land use scenarios. Table 3. ABAG 2040 Employment Growth Estimates by Land Use Scenario (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Initial Core Focused Core Outward Vision Concentration Scenario Concentration Growth Scenario Unconstrained Constrained Scenario Scenario Scenario Downtown Dublin Specific 14,189 9,505 5,749 5,644 6,018 Plan Area PDA Town Center PDA 2,387 765 548 545 593 Transit Center PDA 1,735 204 171 161 204 Total In PDAs 18,311 10,474 6,468 6,350 6,815 Total Outside PDAs 18,169 22,045 16,592 16,083 20,554 Citywide Total 36,480 32,519 23,060 22,433 27,369 Table 4 below provides a comparison of the City's 2040 employment growth estimates based on current Planning documents including the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan and ABAG's 2040 employment growth estimates. The data presented in Table 4 for each of the five land use scenarios reflects the difference between the City's estimates and ABAG's estimates shown above in Table 3. For example, a positive number reflects an overestimation by ABAG and a negative number reflects an underestimation when compared to the City's estimates. Page 8 of 11 Table 4. City of Dublin 2040 Employment Growth Estimates versus ABAG 2040 Employment Growth Estimates by Land Use Scenario City (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Estimates Initial Core Focused Core Outward Vision Concentration Scenario Concentration Growth Scenario Unconstrained Constrained Scenario Scenario Scenario Downtown Dublin 5,952 +8,237 +3,553 -203 -308 +66 Specific Plan Area PDA Town Center PDA 3,014 -627 -2,249 -2,466 -2,469 -2,421 Transit Center PDA 9,028 -7,293 -8,824 -8,857 -8,867 -8,824 Total In PDAs 17,994 +317 -7,520 -11,526 -11,644 -11,179 Total Outside PDAs 26,907 -8,738 -4,862 -10,315 -10,824 -6,353 Citywide Total 44,901 -8,421 -12,382 -21,841 -22,468 -17,532 Staff has analyzed the employment growth estimates for each of the five land use scenarios. Below is a summary of how each Scenario performed when compared to the City's estimates. The underestimation of employment growth appears to assert that jobs would be directed to the urban core leaving commercial property in Dublin vacant or assumed to be converted to residential use. Initial Vision Scenario Employment growth estimates for the Initial Vision Scenario are overestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (8,237 jobs), underestimated in the Town Center PDA (627 jobs) and underestimated in the Transit Center PDA (7,293 jobs). Citywide, employment growth is underestimated by almost 8,500 jobs. The goal of the Initial Vision Scenario is to concentrate housing and job growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs) based on input from local jurisdictions on the level of growth they can reasonably accommodate given resources, local plans and community support. Staff has incorporated comments in the draft letter to ABAG and MTC (see Attachment 12) based on the City's estimates which are derived from current Planning documents. Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario Employment growth estimates for the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario are overestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (3,553 jobs) and underestimated in the Town Center PDA (2,249 jobs) and Transit Center PDA (8,824 jobs). Citywide, employment growth is underestimated by over 12,000 jobs. The goal of the Core Concentration Unconstrained Scenario is to concentrate housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area. This could explain the underestimation of jobs in the Town Center PDA and Transit Center PDA as jobs are shifted to the urban core. Focused Scenario Employment growth estimates for the Focused Scenario are underestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (203 jobs), the Town Center PDA (2,466 jobs) and Page 9 of 11 Transit Center PDA (8,857). Citywide, employment growth is underestimated by almost 22,000 jobs. The Focused Scenario reflects the potential of PDAs throughout the region with an emphasis on major transit corridors. Based on the underestimation of jobs in all three PDAs and Citywide this scenario appears to direct job growth away from outlying areas such as Dublin. Core Concentration Constrained Scenario Employment growth estimates for the Core Concentration Constrained Scenario are underestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (308 jobs), the Town Center PDA (2,469 jobs) and Transit Center PDA (8,867). Citywide, employment growth is underestimated by almost 22,500 jobs. The Core Concentration Constrained Scenario reflects a concentration of housing and job growth at selected PDAs along the core transit network in the Inner Bay Area. Similar to the Focused Scenario, this Scenario underestimates job growth in all PDAs and Citywide which reflects the shift in jobs from outlying areas of the region to the urban core. Outward Growth Scenario Employment growth estimates for the Outward Growth Scenario are overestimated in the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Area PDA (66 jobs) and underestimated in the Town Center PDA (2,421 jobs) and Transit Center PDA (8,824). Citywide, employment growth is underestimated by over 17,500 jobs. The Outward Growth Scenario reflects higher levels of growth in the inland areas of the Bay Area and is intended to align closer with past development trends. Staff has prepared a draft letter to ABAG and MTC with comments on all five land use scenarios (see Attachment 12). The next phase in the development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy is the preparation of the Preferred Scenario which is anticipated to be released in March 2012. The Preferred Scenario will be the land use scenario that is adopted as part of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: This is an informational report to the City Council at the request of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to receive input from elected officials on the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy. An informational report is not subject to a public hearing and therefore a public notice is not required. As the lead agencies, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have been conducting public outreach in the development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy. A public workshop for residents and stakeholders in Alameda County was held on Wednesday, January 11, 2012 at 5:45pm at the Dublin Civic Center. Staff from ABAG and MTC provided an overview of the Sustainable Communities Strategy and solicited input from attendees on transportation trade-offs and the quality of complete communities. The transportation trade-offs focused on various transportation investments and workshop participants were asked to rank which were most important to them Page 10 of 11 (i.e. increase the number of carpool lanes, maintain existing roads, provide more frequent bus service, etc.). The quality of complete communities focused on the location of jobs and housing and workshop participants were asked to identify which community benefits were most important to them (i.e. safer neighborhoods, increased open space, better schools, etc.). ABAG and MTC will use the input they received at the public workshop as well as input from elected officials to inform the Preferred Scenario. Additionally, ABAG and MTC have solicited input from local jurisdictions through an optional on- line survey. Staff completed the survey which was due on January 20, 2012. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Staff Report dated May 17, 2011 with attachments. 2. City Council Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2011. 3. Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Priority Development Area Map. 4. The Dublin Town Center Priority Development Area Map. 5. Dublin Transit Center/Dublin Crossings Priority Development Area Map. 6. Letter dated May 20, 2011 to MTC and ABAG regarding the Initial Vision Scenario. 7. Sustainable Communities Strategy Alternative Land Use Scenarios revised September 1, 2011. 8. The Plan Bay Area Scenario Analysis. 9. Plan Bay Area Draft Scenarios Assessment Results memorandum dated December 2, 2011. 10. The Plan Bay Area Equity Analysis Overview. 11. MTC Communities of Concern 2011 Map. 12. Draft letter dated February 8, 2012 to MTC and ABAG regarding the Alternative Scenarios. Page 11 of 11 February 8, 2012 Metropolitan Transportation Commission CITY OF Joseph P. Sort MetroCenter DUBLIN 1018th Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 100 Civic Plaza ©uhlln, California 9456$ Association of Bay Area Gavernmen#s Phone: {925) 833-6650 Joseph P. Sort MetroCen#er Fax: {925) 833-6651 1018th Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Subject: Loco! Government Feedback on Alternative Scenarios To Whom It May Concern: At the February 7, 2012 Clty Council meeting Staff presented the alternative [and use scenarios and performance targets analysis to the Dublin City Council and solicited their feedback. Of all of the land use scenarios, the Core Constrained Scenario, while underestimating household growth in each of Dublin's three Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and Citywide, most closely aligns with the level of household growth anticipated in the City's General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (see Table 1 on next pagef. The Focused Scenario is also relatively close to the level of household growth anticipated in Dublin except that it overestimates households in the Downtown II CltyCouncil Dublin PDA, {925) 833-6650 i CityiVlanager {9251 833-6650 The DOWntOWn Dublin Specific Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report Cammunityl]evelopment were ado ted in Februa 2011 and increased the develo ment atentlal in the {925}833-66Ip ~ ry p p EcanomlcDeveiopment Downtown Dublin PDA by 661 units. Any additional housing development would (925) 833-6650 require an amendment to the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan, environmental review _ Finance/Admin Services (szs} s33-s6aa and an evaluation of infrastructure needs. A funding source would also need to be FlrePrevention identified to cover the costs associated with a Specific Plan amendment, (9zs} s33-sso6 environmental review and infrastructure u rades. Human Resources pg i (925}833-6605 i Parks & Community Services (925}556-4500 Police (925)833-5670 Public works/Engineering (925)833-b630 I~ Dublin AF~decaElb zai~ www.dublin.ca.gav i I I I I i I Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Government Page 2 February 8, 2fl12 fable 1. Household Growth i;stimates (2©40] (1) (2) (3} {4) (5) City Initial Core Focused Core Outward Estimates Vision Concentration Scenario' Concentration ` Groavth 'Scenario Unconstrained Constrained Scenario j Scenario. Scenario Downtown 2,309 i,i543 1,822 1,262 2,127 1,6341 Dublin PDA Totem 7;12D 7,503 5,895 5,895 6,460 .:5,9492 Ce~~ter ~~n Transit 2,454 3,736 3,204 3,204 3,970 3,400° Center PDA Totalln -:11;883 12;$82 10,92E 10,3t3i 12;557 10,983' P DAs Total 23,247 20,794 17,803 15,452 18,134 17,7185 Outside PDAs 3 Citywide 35,130 33,576 28,724 25,813 30,691 28,701- Total' f3's4 exssting units as of 2091;1,300 new units par the Downtown Dublin Speafic Plan zBased on approved entitlements and units remaining p~ the ~asiern Dublin Speafic Plan 385 units ooufd be added if the Brea G PubliclSemi•Public site is converted to residential x1,800 unts at the Dublin Transit Center and 1,600 units at Camp Parks1SunCal 52,021 units may be added if the following are entitled: Doolan Canyon (1,990), Positano PlSI'(12}and Area F P1SP (19) With respect to employment growth, all five land use scenarios grossly underestimate future employment growth in the Town Center PDA and Transit Center PDA {see i Table 2 on next page). i i For the purposes of comparison, Dublin assumes full build out by 204fl whereas the i three constrained land use scenarios {Focused Scenario, Core Concentration Scenario and Outward Growth Scenario) reflect very little employment growth over the next 30 years (2010-204fl~. In the Town Center PDA and Transit Center PDA, the constrained land use scenarios assume only ±200 additional jobs over the next 30 years. Failure to recognize the job growth potential within the Transit Center PDA undermines the value of this PDA and II its close proximity to the Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station. In the Town Center PDA, vacant land designated for genera[ commercial at the intersection of two major thoroughfares, Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road, makes this a prime location for retail and has generated a lot of interest within the development community. It is unrealistic to assume that this land will remain vacant for the next 3fl years. I~I ~I Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Government Page 3 February 8, 2012 Table 2. Employment Growth Estimates (204D) t1} (3} 44) (5)' city Initial Core ' Focused Core Outward Estimates Vision Concentr~#ion 'Scenario' Concentration.:. Grotiukh ':.Scenario Unconstrained Constrained Scenario Scenario 5eenario Downtown 14,189 9,505 5,749 5,644 6,018 5,952 Dublin PRA Town 2,387 765 `-548 545 593 3,014 Center PDI~ Transit 1,735 204 171 161 204 9,028 Center PDA Total R} 18,311 3U,474 6,468 6,354 6,$3.5 17,994 PDAs Total 18,169 22,045 16,592 16,083 20,554 26,907 Outside PDAs Cityuride 36,480 32,519 23,060 ' 22,433 27,369 .44,901 fatal The City thanks you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Alternative Scenarios. We respectfully request that focal plans he taken into greater consideration when looking at projected household and employment growth over the ~ next 3U years. We hope that our comments provide additional insight and are reflected in the household and job growth allocations in the Preferred Scenario. I Sincerely, Jeri Ram, AICP Community Development Director i CC: lonl Pattlllo, City Manager I Chris Foss, Assistant Clty Manager Jeff Balser, Planning Manager Marnle Delgado, Senior Planner II I April 18, 2012 CITY OF DT TBT T 1~T Metropolitan Transportation Commission lJ L1/V Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 8th Street 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, California 94568 Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Phone: (925) 833-6650 Fax: (925) 833-6651 Association of Bay Area Governments Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter 101 8th Street Oakland, CA 94607-4756 Subject: Local Government Feedback on the Preferred Land Use Scenario To Whom It May Concern: At the April 17, 2012 City Council meeting Staff presented the draft Preferred Land Use Scenario to the Dublin City Council and solicited their feedback. The draft Preferred Land Use Scenario fails to incorporate comments provided by the City of Dublin for both the Initial Vision Scenario and the Alternative Scenarios (Attachments 1 and 2). In fact, the level of housing growth in the draft Preferred Scenario is greater than in all previous land use scenarios and the level of job growth is significantly lower than City estimates which are clear indications that the City's comments have not been incorporated into the development of the Preferred Scenario. citycouncii The Preferred Scenario assumes 36,560 housing units in Dublin in 2040; the City (925) 833-6650 City Manager estimates 28,701 housing units, or 7,859 fewer housing units than assumed in the (92s> 833-66so Preferred Scenario. The draft Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario report released on Community Development (92s> 833-66io March 9, 2012 does not provide a breakdown of housing units by Priority Economic Development Development Area (PDA). Therefore, we are not able to determine how many units (925) 833-6650 Finance/Admin Services have been assigned to each of the three PDAs in Dublin, let alone know where these (92s> 833-664o additional 7,859 housing units are proposed to be located. Table 1 below provides Fire Prevention Dublin's estimates of housin rowth both Cit wide and b PDA. (925) 833-6606 g g y y Human Resources (925) 833-6605 Table 1. Projected Housing Units (2040) Parks & Community Services (925) 556-4500 Preferred City Ponce Scenario Estimates (925) 833-6670 Public Works/Engineering Downtown Dublin PDA N/A 1,6341 (925) 833-6630 Town Center PDA N/A 5,949z,s Transit Center PDA N/A 3,4004 ~ -blip Total In PDAs N/A 10,983 ~ uV Total Outside PDAs N/A 17,7185 ~t . ' ~ Citywide Total 36,560 28,701 2®11 X334 existing units as of 2011; 1,300 new units per the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan ZBased on approved entitlements and units remaining per the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan www.dublin.ca.gov 385 units could be added if the Area GPublic/Semi-Public site is converted to residential 41,800 units at the Dublin Transit Center and 1,600 units at Camp Parks/SunCal 52,021 units maybe added if the following are entitled: Doolan Canyon (1,990), Positano P/SP(12) and Area F P/SP (19) Based on current Planning documents, certified environmental impact reports, and recently constructed neighborhoods that will remain in place far beyond 2040, Dublin cannot accommodate the level of growth that the Preferred Scenario assumes. It is also worth noting that the Preferred Scenario assumes 3,750 fewer households than housing units in 2040 which assumes a 10%vacancy rate City-wide. Additionally, the overestimation of housing growth in the Preferred Scenario has the potential to result in an increased housing unit allocation as part of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the 2014-2022 planning period and jeopardize our ability to obtain a certified Housing Element. With respect to employment growth, the Preferred Scenario assumes 28,060 jobs in Dublin in 2040; the City estimates 44,901 lobs, or 16,841 more lobs than assumed in the Preferred Scenario. As noted above, the draft Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario report released on March 9, 2012 does not provide a breakdown of jobs by Priority Development Area for us to know where jobs are being allocated. Table 2 below provides Dublin's estimates ofjob growth both Citywide and by PDA. Table 2. Projected Jobs (2040) Preferred City Scenario Estimates Downtown Dublin PDA N/A 5,952 Town Center PDA N/A 3,014 Transit Center PDA N/A 9,028 Total In PDAs N/A 17,994 Total Outside PDAs N/A 26,907 Citywide Total 28,060 44,901 As stated in our February 8, 2012 comment letter on the Alternative Land Use Scenarios, employment growth in Dublin is grossly underestimated. Failure to recognize the job growth potential within Dublin and especially within the Transit Center Priority Development Area (PDA) undermines the value of this PDA and its ability to capitalize on the financial investments made by the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART). Additionally, the performance targets adopted to evaluate the effectiveness of the land use scenario such as, reducing C02 emissions from cars and light-duty trucks, increasing daily walking and biking, reducing transportation costs, and reducing vehicle miles traveled would all benefit from Dublin's ability to provide jobs near BART. Dublin has two BART Stations with surrounding land available to accommodate significant office development. The City is also located at the intersection of two major freeways (I-580 and I-680). Therefore, Dublin is in a unique position to leverage the existing investment in transportation infrastructure to accommodate significantly more job growth than assigned in the Preferred Scenario. The City thanks you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Preferred Scenario. We strongly urge you to take our local plans into greater consideration when projecting household and employment growth over the next 30 years. We want to see our local plans reflected in the household and job growth allocations in the final Preferred Scenario. Sincerely, Jeri Ram, AICP Community Development Director CC: Joni Pattillo, City Manager Chris Foss, Assistant City Manager Jeff Baker, Planning Manager Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner Beth Walukas, Deputy Director of Planning Attachments: 1) Initial Vision Scenario comment letter dated May 20, 2011 2) Alternative Scenarios comment letter dated February 8, 2012